Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump
On March 31, 2026, President Trump issued a sweeping Executive Order titled "Ensuring Citizen Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections," seeking once again to seize control of election administration from Congress and the states. The Order directs federal agencies to compile lists of U.S. citizens and transmit them to states before every election, directs the U.S. Postal Service -- an independent agency established by Congress -- to create a list of "approved" mail voters, and instructs USPS to refuse to deliver ballots from voters not on that federally created list. If implemented, the Order would threaten the ability of millions of eligible citizens to cast their ballots, particularly military members, overseas citizens, the elderly, recently naturalized citizens, and voters with disabilities who rely on mail voting.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
Featured
Washington, D.C.
Oct 2025
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
League of Women Voters Education Fund v. Trump
On March 25, 2025, in a sweeping and unprecedented Executive Order, President Trump attempted to usurp the power to regulate federal elections from Congress and the States. Among other things, the Executive Order directs the Election Assistance Commission—an agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independent—to require voters to show a passport or other citizenship documentation in order to register to vote in federal elections. If implemented, the Executive Order would threaten the ability of millions of eligible Americans to register and vote and upend the administration of federal elections.
On behalf of leading voter registration organizations and advocacy organizations, the ACLU and co-counsel filed a lawsuit to block the Executive Order as an unconstitutional power grab.
All Cases
52 Fighting Cuts to Voting Access Cases
Illinois
Jan 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
United States v. Matthews
The Department of Justice sued the Illinois Board of Elections, demanding the state produce its full, unredacted voter file, which contains highly sensitive and personal data on every voter in the state. This suit appears to be part of the federal government's efforts to build a national voter database without congressional authorization and to improperly question the validity of state voter rolls.
Explore case
Illinois
Jan 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
United States v. Matthews
The Department of Justice sued the Illinois Board of Elections, demanding the state produce its full, unredacted voter file, which contains highly sensitive and personal data on every voter in the state. This suit appears to be part of the federal government's efforts to build a national voter database without congressional authorization and to improperly question the validity of state voter rolls.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
Watson v. Republican National Committee (Amicus)
In 2020, in a nearly unanimous bipartisan vote, Mississippi joined eighteen other states in accepting mail ballots postmarked by Election Day that arrived after Election Day (in Mississippi’s case, up to five business days). This lawsuit by partisan actors seeks to disenfranchise these voters whose ballot is mailed by Election Day but—through no fault of their own—does not arrive until afterwards. In Mississippi, this harm will fall disproportionately on voters with disabilities, older voters, and other communities that rely upon absentee voting. Twisting the words and meaning of Congress, the RNC argues that three longstanding federal laws that set a uniform election day for federal races require that ballot may only be counted if they are received by election officials by Election Day. If accepted, this radical argument would not only disenfranchise thousands upon thousands of voters in Mississippi and thirty other states, but also upend election administration in every state.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
Watson v. Republican National Committee (Amicus)
In 2020, in a nearly unanimous bipartisan vote, Mississippi joined eighteen other states in accepting mail ballots postmarked by Election Day that arrived after Election Day (in Mississippi’s case, up to five business days). This lawsuit by partisan actors seeks to disenfranchise these voters whose ballot is mailed by Election Day but—through no fault of their own—does not arrive until afterwards. In Mississippi, this harm will fall disproportionately on voters with disabilities, older voters, and other communities that rely upon absentee voting. Twisting the words and meaning of Congress, the RNC argues that three longstanding federal laws that set a uniform election day for federal races require that ballot may only be counted if they are received by election officials by Election Day. If accepted, this radical argument would not only disenfranchise thousands upon thousands of voters in Mississippi and thirty other states, but also upend election administration in every state.
Minnesota
Jan 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
United States v. Simon
Representing the League of Women Voters Minnesota, Common Cause, and two Minnesota voters with past felony convictions, the ACLU Voting Rights Project and ACLU of Minnesota have filed a motion to intervene in a federal lawsuit over the federal government’s demand that Minnesota turn over its entire voter registration rolls, including with voters’ sensitive personal data such as drivers’ license numbers and partial social security numbers.
Explore case
Minnesota
Jan 2026
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
United States v. Simon
Representing the League of Women Voters Minnesota, Common Cause, and two Minnesota voters with past felony convictions, the ACLU Voting Rights Project and ACLU of Minnesota have filed a motion to intervene in a federal lawsuit over the federal government’s demand that Minnesota turn over its entire voter registration rolls, including with voters’ sensitive personal data such as drivers’ license numbers and partial social security numbers.
Colorado
Dec 2025
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
United States v. Griswold
Representing Common Cause and two Colorado voters, the ACLU Voting Rights Project and ACLU of Colorado have filed a motion to intervene in a federal lawsuit over the federal government’s demand that Colorado turn over its entire voter registration rolls, including voters’ sensitive personal data such as drivers’ license numbers and partial social security numbers.
Explore case
Colorado
Dec 2025
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
United States v. Griswold
Representing Common Cause and two Colorado voters, the ACLU Voting Rights Project and ACLU of Colorado have filed a motion to intervene in a federal lawsuit over the federal government’s demand that Colorado turn over its entire voter registration rolls, including voters’ sensitive personal data such as drivers’ license numbers and partial social security numbers.
New Mexico
Dec 2025
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
United States v. Oliver
The Department of Justice sued New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, demanding the state produce its full, unredacted voter file, which contains highly sensitive and personal data on every voter in the state. This suit appears to be part of the federal government's efforts to build a national voter database without congressional authorization and to improperly question the validity of state voter rolls.
Explore case
New Mexico
Dec 2025
Fighting Cuts to Voting Access
United States v. Oliver
The Department of Justice sued New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, demanding the state produce its full, unredacted voter file, which contains highly sensitive and personal data on every voter in the state. This suit appears to be part of the federal government's efforts to build a national voter database without congressional authorization and to improperly question the validity of state voter rolls.