The Center for Election Confidence (CEC) filed an amicus brief in USA v. Benson (No. 26-1225) with partners Restoring Integrity and Trust in Elections (RITE) and the Honest Elections Project, urging the 6th Circuit to reverse a district court’s decision that barred the U.S. Government from compelling Michigan to produce its voter registration file despite clear text to the contrary.

The brief asserts that the lower court’s “holding that neither the NVRA nor the CRA requires Michigan to provide its unredacted statewide voter registration list to the DOJ” contravenes both the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and the Civil Rights Act of 1960 (CRA) and “eviscerates Congress’s intent to ensure transparency and accountability in the maintenance of voter registration rolls.” The Brief further asserts that the district court’s “refusal to permit the government to obtain the records” frustrates the “core congressional purpose” of the NVRA and the CRA while undermining “public confidence in the electoral process.”

The brief begins by examining the NVRA and CRA statutes, which mandate that voter registration records “shall” be provided upon request by the public and the attorney general, respectively. Specifically, “it is clear from the text of the CRA and the NVRA, as well as their respective histories, that they are to be interpreted broadly, with transparency serving as their central aim—ensuring that the public and federal authorities have full access to the records and processes underlying voter registration and election administration.” The brief subsequently argues that the district court’s decision to dismiss the Government’s lawsuit to compel disclosure of the requested voter records “flies in the face of the codified purpose of transparency” and “improperly narrows the scope of the CRA and NVRA.”

The brief next raises the Government’s compelling interest “in preserving the integrity of its electoral process” and that “‘registration lists lie at the root of most problems encountered in U.S. elections,’” citing the Carter-Baker Commission. In addition, the 6th Circuit has established a strong doctrinal line that “‘[e]nabling the casting of one vote does little good if another voter fraudulently cancels it out’” (citing Ohio Republican Party v. Brunner, 544 F.3d 711, 713 (6th Cir. 2008) (en banc)) with amici arguing that “[t]he NVRA and the CRA are precisely the tools Congress enacted to address” the risks inherent in voter registration processes. As such, federal courts have “long recognized that illegitimate or fraudulent votes dilute the effect of legitimate ballots” and “permitting Michigan to withhold its voter registration rolls would jeopardize election integrity . . . by undermining the transparency and accountability essential to a functioning democratic process.”

Finally, the brief demonstrates that the “need for robust federal oversight of election records is underscored by the sustained erosion of voter confidence across the political spectrum” citing recent polling that shows decreased confidence that votes are “accurately cast and counted.”

Compounding the problems of fraud for voter confidence, the Government’s “inability to obtain. . . the records necessary to assess list maintenance practices” undermines confidence in elections by disabling “the very tools by which citizens vindicate their rights and hold the government accountable”

CEC, RITE, and the Honest Elections Project urge the 6th Circuit to overturn the district court’s opinion below.

The Center for Election Confidence thanks Zachary C. Larsen and Michael J. Patwell of Clark Hill PLC for their representation in this matter—as well as RITE and the Honest Elections Project for their collaboration with CEC.