The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a lawsuit Notice of complaint on Monday before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in a case personal information in relation to Massachusetts voters.
After the Commonwealth Secretary refused to release the information, the government filed a lawsuit. In the complaint, the administration argued that failure to comply with this request constituted a violation of the regulations Section 303 of the Civil Rights Act of 1960. Section 303 operates in parallel with Section 301, which requires states to retain information on “all records and papers which come into its possession relating to applications, registrations…or other acts necessary for voting” for a period of 22 months. The Attorney General or a 303 employee may request these records by written notice.
When submitting a Motion to Dismissthe secretary explained that the requested records were “outside the scope of the law.” In addition, the minister explained that state and federal laws require the “redacting of sensitive personal information.”
Judge Leo Sorokin granted the motion to dismiss in April. In a primarily textual analysis, he found that the law required a statement of the basis of the action, and he found none. While the claim provided a basis for racial discrimination, it was merely a judgment. Furthermore, the judge considered that this was “nothing that could be regarded as a factual basis for the claim”.
Furthermore, in his textual analysis, he stated that a foundation must be the foundation or “main supporting factor.” This required a “factual basis”, not a conceivable statement. The court found that the complaint had no factual basis.
As a result of this decision and subsequent appeal, the case goes to the First District.
The facts raise questions about data security and election security just as the midterm elections approach. According to the ACLUDOJ wants to create a “national voter database.” In its motions to intervene, the ACLU argued that this could impact voters’ right to vote. Common Cause, Jane Doe Inc and a naturalized citizen all intervened due to privacy and disenfranchisement concerns.
