The Center for Election Confidence (CEC) has filed an amicus brief in U.S. v. Wisconsin Elections Commission (No. 3:25-CV-01036-AMB). This case before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin considers whether the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) may compel the State of Wisconsin to provide an unreacted copy of its voter registration list to the DOJ for inspection in accordance with the Civil Rights Act of 1960 and the Voting Rights Amendments. CEC argues that Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 and the Voting Rights Amendments permit such action in order to ensure lawful voters are protected from vote dilution and other voting rights offenses and urges the court to find in favor of the United States.

CEC argues that Section 303 of the Civil Rights Act expressly permits the Attorney General to inspect all records related to voting in the state. The brief notes that “Congress granted this authority to obtain state records as a tool to monitor and protect voting rights,” which “include the right of each voter to cast an effective ballot.” Therefore, DOJ may inspect voting records for any purpose relating to protection of voting rights, including to ensure that lawful voters’ ballots are not being “diluted or cancelled by unlawful ballots.” The brief emphasizes that the DOJ has a legitimate purpose in requesting voting records under the Civil Rights Act and in accordance with the Voting Rights Amendment.

First, the brief argues that the federal authority of the Voting Rights Amendments is broader than that of the Election Clause, so standard Elections Clause-style concerns are inapposite. Ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment, in particular, “expressly delegated to Congress broader authority to enforce [the amendment’s] provisions to protect voting rights.” This stands in contrast to the limited congressional but strong state authorities over the administration of federal elections pursuant to the Elections Clause. “Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1960 pursuant to the broader authority of the Voting Rights Amendments,” granting the federal government oversight powers “as the protector of voting rights for enumerated classes.”

CEC’s brief goes on to describe the wide variety of ways in which “federal courts have consistently recognized that illegitimate or fraudulent votes dilute the effect of legitimate ballots, and protecting against such affronts to the franchise is an appropriate exercise of federal authority pursuant to the Voting Rights Amendments” to protect voting rights. A voter should have his or her vote honestly counted and without dilution, and CEC reminds the court that “voters have a civil right to equal voting power”. Such voting power is unequal when diluted by unlawful ballots. The DOJ is exercising appropriate federal authority when attempting to ensure that lawful voters have honest elections without unlawful interference or dilution. 

Next, CEC’s brief argues that the DOJ’s purpose for its records request is sufficient because it “relates broadly to the enforcement of the provisions of the Voting Rights Amendments”. Under 52 U.S.C. § 20703, the Attorney General’s purpose for obtaining records is not reviewable under a subjective standard by a court; while the Attorney General must state his or her reason, courts have no purchase for engaging in deeper scrutiny with respect to such actions.

Finally, CEC urges the Court to apply the presumption of good faith widely “afforded to government officials while going about their duties.” The DOJ is clearly within its constitutional and statutory authority to demand these records from the States for the purpose of protecting voting rights. “Innuendo, suspicion, conjecture, or counsel’s argument are not sufficient” to defeat the presumption, “yet that is all Defendants, their supporting Amici, and Intervenors have offered.” Proxtronics Dosimetry v. U.S., 128 Fed. Cl. 656, 682 (2016).

CEC urges the court to rule in favor of the United States so that the Attorney General may procure state election records and inspect them to ensure lawful voters remain protected from vote dilution. The DOJ is granted “express authority that the Voting Rights Amendments’ constitutional protections for voting rights be enforced, and it may legitimately do so to protect voters’ from seeing their votes cancelled out by unlawful ballots.”

The Center for Election Confidence thanks Daniel R. Suhr of the Center for American Rights and Jacob J. Curtis of HJC Law and Consulting for their representation in this matter.