Election Lawsuits This Year: Trump’s Order, DOJ Suits, State Fights

Election lawsuits in 2026 have been dominated by a single trigger: President Trump’s March 31 executive order directing federal agencies to take a hands-on role in how states run federal elections. That order has produced a 24-state coalition suit, parallel challenges from voting rights groups, a Postal Service rulemaking fight, and a separate wave of Department of Justice lawsuits demanding state voter rolls. Alongside those federal cases, state courts and the U.S. Supreme Court have ruled on proof-of-citizenship laws, voter engagement crimes, and a contested Alabama congressional map. Most of the biggest cases are unresolved as the November midterms approach.

The Executive Order Behind Most of the Litigation

Executive Order 14399, titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” directs several federal agencies into roles traditionally held by states.¹ Its main provisions:

The Department of Homeland Security, working with the Social Security Administration, must give each state a list of confirmed U.S. citizens of voting age at least 60 days before any federal election.²
The Postmaster General must issue new rules for mail-in and absentee ballot envelopes, including mandatory barcodes, and the USPS would not transmit ballots unless voters appear on a state-submitted participation list.³
The Attorney General is told to prioritize prosecution of officials who issue ballots to ineligible people, and federal funds may be withheld from noncompliant states.²
States and localities must preserve voter participation records for five years.

The order also instructs the Election Assistance Commission to require documentary proof of citizenship on the national mail voter registration form.⁴

The 24-State Coalition Lawsuit

On April 3, 2026, 24 states and the District of Columbia sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to block the order. California v. Trump is co-led by the attorneys general of California, Massachusetts, Nevada, and Washington, with 19 other attorneys general and Pennsylvania’s governor joining.⁵

The coalition argues the Constitution gives states, not the White House, primary authority over elections, and that the order violates separation of powers by making sweeping changes without Congress.⁶ They also contend that the DHS citizenship lists, built using the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database, are inaccurate enough to cause wrongful voter purges.⁷

The states filed a motion for summary judgment on April 23, 2026, asking Judge Indira Talwani to permanently block the order’s key provisions. A hearing was set for June 2, 2026, and the case remained pending as of mid-June.⁸⁹

The Mail-In Voting Challenge

A separate case in the same Boston court was brought by the League of Women Voters, the Association of Americans Resident Overseas, Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, and other nonprofit groups. They argue the order would disenfranchise elderly, disabled, and minority voters who rely on mail-in ballots.¹⁰

On June 18, 2026, the court denied part of the federal government’s motion to dismiss, letting the challenge proceed as to the 2026 midterms.¹¹ A motion for a preliminary injunction against the USPS is still pending.

A related case before Judge Carl Nichols in Washington, D.C., went the other way on May 28, 2026. Judge Nichols declined to block the order, reasoning that the USPS had not yet taken concrete implementation steps, so the plaintiffs could not show the immediate harm courts need to intervene. He left the door open for renewed motions once agencies act.¹²

The USPS has started acting. On June 2, 2026, it published a proposed rule, “Ballot Mail for Federal Elections,” in the Federal Register, requiring official election mail logos, serialized barcodes, and a new “Federal Ballot Mail Portal” through which states would submit voter participation lists.¹³ The comment period closes July 2, 2026. The NAACP Legal Defense Fund moved the next day to halt the rule, arguing it conflicts with a 2021 settlement requiring on-time delivery of election mail through 2028.¹⁴

DOJ Lawsuits Over State Voter Rolls

Running alongside the executive order fight, the Department of Justice has sued 30 states and Washington, D.C., for refusing to turn over unredacted voter registration lists that include driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers. The DOJ says it needs the data to enforce federal list-maintenance laws, and officials have confirmed the intent to cross-reference the records against the DHS SAVE database.¹⁵

At least 15 states have complied or agreed to, including Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming.¹⁶

Courts Have Dismissed Several DOJ Suits

Federal judges in Michigan, California, Oregon, and Massachusetts have thrown out the DOJ’s cases. In Michigan, Chief Judge Hala Y. Jarbou ruled that none of the three statutes the DOJ cited (the Civil Rights Act of 1960, the National Voter Registration Act, and the Help America Vote Act) require states to hand over unredacted voter data.¹⁷ A California judge wrote that the administration “may not unilaterally usurp the authority over elections” granted to states and Congress, and an Oregon judge cited “contradictory public statements” by DOJ officials as evidence of “ulterior motives.”¹⁸ In Massachusetts, Judge Leo Sorokin dismissed the case for failure to provide the factual basis the 1960 Civil Rights Act requires.¹⁹ The DOJ is appealing in California, Michigan, and Oregon.

Common Cause Countersuit

On April 21, 2026, Common Cause and four individual voters sued the DOJ in federal court in Washington, D.C., to block what they describe as a “national voter database.” The suit asks the court to stop the data collection, order the DOJ to delete data already obtained, and bar the agency from sharing voter information with DHS or private contractors.²⁰ A motion for partial summary judgment filed May 19, 2026, remains pending.²¹

What DHS Is Actually Building

A June 8, 2026, DHS memo says the agency is on track to finish a portal by June 30 that will let state election officials download citizenship data (names, dates of birth, and agency identifiers) from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Social Security Administration, and the State Department. The memo also acknowledges it is “not feasible” to have a citizen-facing portal ready at the same time. States will receive the lists before individual voters can check them for errors or submit corrections.²² U.S. senators have raised concerns that contradictory DOJ statements in court make it unclear whether voter data is already being shared with DHS.²³

Proof-of-Citizenship Fights in the States

New Hampshire

On May 28, 2026, U.S. District Judge Samantha Elliott struck down New Hampshire’s HB 1569, a 2024 law requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register. In a 98-page ruling, Judge Elliott held that the law violated the First and 14th Amendments by imposing unjustifiable burdens on voting and denying due process. She noted historical voter fraud in the state is “essentially non-existent,” with 47 documented cases of wrongful voting (eight involving noncitizens) out of 8.3 million ballots cast between 1998 and 2024.²⁴ The ruling blocks the law for the 2026 primary and general elections.²⁵ The New Hampshire Attorney General’s office has said it intends to appeal.

Louisiana

Louisiana sued the U.S. Election Assistance Commission on April 14, 2026, in federal court in Monroe after the EAC deadlocked on a request to modify the national mail voter registration form to include Louisiana-specific proof-of-citizenship requirements. The state is also asking the court to declare the National Voter Registration Act unconstitutional as applied to Louisiana.²⁶²⁷ On April 17, 2026, voting rights groups including the League of Women Voters of Louisiana, the NAACP Louisiana State Conference, and Voice of the Experienced moved to intervene, arguing the requirements would disproportionately disenfranchise elderly, rural, low-income, and nonwhite voters.²⁸

Alabama’s Congressional Map Returns to the Supreme Court

On June 2, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed a lower court order and allowed Alabama to use its 2023 congressional map for the 2026 elections, even though a three-judge district court had found the map intentionally discriminated against Black voters. The unsigned order drew on the Court’s April 2026 decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which rewrote the standards for Section 2 Voting Rights Act claims.²⁹

Under Callais, courts must presume state legislatures acted in good faith, challengers cannot use race as a districting criterion when drawing alternative maps, and racially polarized voting analyses must control for party affiliation. The majority held the district court failed to apply those standards.³⁰ The Court also cited the Purcell principle, which discourages changing election rules close to an election.

Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson, dissented, writing that the decision “debases the democratic process” by forcing an election under a map found to be discriminatory. The district court has scheduled retrial no later than January 2027.³¹

Other 2026 Cases Worth Knowing

California Sues Shasta County

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber sued Shasta County on June 12, 2026, to block Measure B, a local initiative approved by 55 percent of voters. The measure would eliminate most mail-in and early voting, require government-issued photo ID for registration and voting, mandate hand-counting of ballots, and create a county voter registration system separate from the state’s.³² State officials argue the measure is preempted by California election law. The case was filed in the California Third District Court of Appeal, with the state seeking to invalidate the measure before November.³³

Missouri Strikes Down Voter Engagement Crimes

On March 24, 2026, the Supreme Court of Missouri permanently blocked four provisions of House Bill 1878, a 2022 law that had made it a crime to compensate people for registering voters, to solicit absentee ballot applications, for non-Missouri voters to engage in registration drives, and for anyone registering more than 10 voters to skip registering with the Secretary of State. The court held these activities are “core political speech” under the Missouri Constitution and that the provisions were impermissibly vague.³⁴

North Carolina Consent Decree

A consent agreement approved in September 2025 by Chief U.S. District Judge Richard E. Myers II requires North Carolina to run a “Registration Repair Project” to collect missing driver’s license and partial Social Security numbers from more than 100,000 voter registrations. No voter is removed from the rolls, but affected voters must cast provisional ballots until they provide the required identification. Federal election choices on those ballots must be counted regardless.³⁵³⁶

FBI Seizure in Fulton County, Georgia

On January 28, 2026, the FBI executed a search warrant and seized 2020 election ballots, ballot images, and voter rolls from a Fulton County, Georgia, election warehouse. Magistrate Judge Catherine M. Salinas authorized the warrant as part of a criminal investigation into whether 2020 election irregularities violated federal record-preservation and election laws.³⁷ U.S. Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Richard Blumenthal called the probe a “sham criminal investigation” and asked the DOJ Inspector General to review it, noting the warrant originated from a U.S. Attorney in Missouri rather than Georgia. No criminal charges have been filed.³⁸

1
The White House. Executive Order 14399 — Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections
2
National Association of Counties. White House Issues Executive Order on Mail Ballot Procedures and Citizenship Verification
3
The American Presidency Project. Executive Order 14399 — Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections
4
The White House. Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections
5
Nevada Secretary of State. Attorney General Ford, Secretary of State Aguilar Announce Lawsuit Against the Trump Administration
6
Massachusetts Attorney General. AG Campbell Sues Trump Administration Over Unlawful Executive Order
7
Nevada Attorney General. Attorney General Ford, Secretary of State Aguilar Announce Lawsuit
8
California Attorney General. Attorney General Bonta Moves to Permanently Block President Trump’s Executive Order
9
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. State of California v. Trump
10
ACLU of Massachusetts. Federal Court Allows Challenge to Executive Order Restricting Mail-In Voting to Proceed
11
ACLU. Federal Court Allows Challenge to Executive Order Restricting Mail-In Voting to Proceed
12
Votebeat. Trump Executive Order Mail Ballots Midterm Elections Carl Nichols
13
Federal Register. Ballot Mail for Federal Elections
14
NAACP Legal Defense Fund. NAACP Moves to Halt USPS Mail-In Ballot Proposed Rule
15
Brennan Center for Justice. Tracker: Justice Department Requests for Voter Information
16
Votebeat. Voting Rights Groups Lawsuit Trump Department of Justice State Voter Roll Requests
17
Votebeat. Trump Justice Department Lawsuit Voter Rolls Data Dismissed
18
Brennan Center for Justice. Federal Courts Reject Trump Administration’s Attempts to Obtain Private Voter Data
19
KCRA. Judge Dismisses DOJ Lawsuit Voter Data Massachusetts
20
Protect Democracy. Protecting Voter Privacy and the Integrity of U.S. Elections
21
ACLU of the District of Columbia. Common Cause v. DOJ
22
Democracy Docket. States to Get Citizenship Lists Before Voters Can Check for Errors
23
U.S. Senate. Letter to DHS Secretary Regarding Executive Order 14399
24
New Hampshire Bulletin. Ahead of Midterms, Federal Court Strikes Down NH Proof-of-Citizenship Voter Registration Law
25
ACLU of New Hampshire. Victory: Court Declares NH Anti-Voter Law Unconstitutional
26
Louisiana Illuminator. Citizenship Voter
27
Courthouse News Service. Seeking Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration, Louisiana Sues Federal Election Agency
28
ACLU. Pro-Voter Groups Move to Join Louisiana’s Lawsuit
29
SCOTUSblog. Supreme Court Permits Alabama to Use Congressional Map Struck by Lower Court as Racially Discriminatory
30
Supreme Court of the United States. Allen v. Milligan, No. 25A1314
31
ACLU. Supreme Court Reinstates Racially Discriminatory Map for Alabama’s 2026 Congressional Elections
32
California Attorney General. Attorney General Bonta, Secretary of State Weber Sue Shasta County Over Measure B
33
The New York Times. California Lawsuit Mail Voting
34
Campaign Legal Center. Victory: Missouri Supreme Court Upholds Ruling Blocking Law Criminalizing Voter Engagement
35
U.S. Department of Justice. Court Enters Consent Order Requiring North Carolina Fix Inaccurate Voter List
36
Surry County Board of Elections. North Carolina Voter Registration Consent Agreement
37
Democracy Docket. Unsealed FBI Affidavit
38
U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Whitehouse, Blumenthal Call for Investigation Into FBI’s Suspicious Seizure of Election Records in Fulton County