ACLU Condemns President Trump’s Executive Order Attempting to Restrict Mail-In Voting

Representing the ACLU of New Hampshire and League of Women Voters of New Hampshire, the ACLU Voting Rights Project, ACLU of New Hampshire, Campaign Legal Center, and Brennan Center filed an amicus brief in a federal lawsuit over the federal government’s demand that Oregon turn over its entire voter registration rolls, including with voters’ sensitive personal data such as drivers’ license numbers and partial social security numbers.

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Today, a Jackson County Circuit Court judge ruled that a new gerrymandered congressional map passed by the Missouri General Assembly as House Bill 1 can stay in place, after a lawsuit by Campaign Legal Center (CLC), the American Civil Liberties Union, and the ACLU of Missouri — on behalf of individual Missouri voters — was filed challenging the state’s unlawful and unprecedented mid-decade redistricting effort following pressure from President Donald Trump. The organizations together issued the following statement: “We respectfully disagree with the trial court’s ruling, which misapplied the law and overlooked overwhelming evidence that the state’s unprecedented mid-decade congressional map violates the Missouri Constitution’s compactness requirement. Drawn under direct pressure from the Trump administration, the map divides the Kansas City area across multiple sprawling districts in clear violation of that constitutional mandate. If allowed to stand, it would represent a significant setback for fair representation in Missouri. “Moreover, the General Assembly’s recent effort to redraw congressional district lines was unconstitutional from the start. That is because the Missouri Constitution also forbids mid-decade redistricting. A separate challenge to the map on this basis is currently before the Missouri Supreme Court, and we have submitted an amicus brief urging the high court to rule in accordance with the state constitution and find the map invalid. “Voters have the right to choose their elected officials under fair maps. Campaign Legal Center, the ACLU Voting Rights Project, and the ACLU of Missouri will continue to fight on behalf of voters in Missouri to ensure that they have an equal say on which elected officials represent them and the issues that matter most to their communities.” BACKGROUND: Missouri’s state Constitution requires redistricting be done only once a decade following the U.S. decennial census, and that maps must be drawn in a “compact” manner — rather than have far-flung, unconnected communities in one district — to prevent partisan gerrymandering. In September 2025, the Missouri General Assembly responded to President Trump’s redistricting push in numerous states by passing a congressional map that broke Kansas City’s metropolitan area into three parts to drown out the urban residents’ political voice. Campaign Legal Center, the ACLU Voting Rights Project, and the ACLU of Missouri filed a lawsuit on behalf of individual voters on the grounds that this map violated the Missouri state Constitution and its compactness requirement. The state trial court misapplied the law to rule that Kansas City’s metropolitan area under this redrawn map met the state’s compactness requirement, and declined to strike down the map. If the new map is allowed to stand, hundreds of thousands of Missouri voters will lose fair representation. A link to today's ruling is here: https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2026/03/Wise-et-al-and-Healey-et-al-v.-State-Order-and-Judgment.pdf

MILWAUKEE – The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin today announced the launch of a joint campaign with the national ACLU to engage Wisconsin voters ahead of the state Supreme Court election on April 7. The organizations are collectively spending $450,000 into a series of radio and digital advertisements on stations across Wisconsin and direct-to-voter mailers during the final weeks of the campaign, focusing on educating voters about where the candidates stand on key issues, including abortion rights, voting rights, and the civil liberties victories in cases that have come before the Wisconsin Supreme Court in recent years. Starting in 2023, the ACLU and the ACLU of Wisconsin have spent more than $3.2 million in Supreme Court races in the state. While the organizations are nonpartisan and do not support or oppose candidates for office, they do educate voters about the pressing issues in races and candidates’ records. Since those initial investments, the new pro-civil liberties majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court has issued rulings to advance critical issues, including striking down a 150-year-old abortion ban that threatened access after Roe was overturned, striking down gerrymandered state legislative maps which paved the way for a more representative democracy, and affirming accessible voting options. “The Wisconsin Supreme Court serves as the last line of defense for our rights,” said Dr. Melinda Brennan, executive director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “As the federal government continues to overstep its authority and undermine core constitutional protections, it is more important than ever that we have a state Supreme Court that will relentlessly defend our rights. “State Supreme Courts have never been so important,” Brennan added. “Wisconsin voters have shown up in droves for these elections for the past few years, and we need that same level of energy and engagement heading into 2026 and beyond to secure our fundamental rights.” Wisconsin Supreme Court justices are responsible for interpreting the state constitution and applying state laws. Because so many decisions depend on this interpretation, the court has the power to make final rulings that impact our civil liberties and often recognize broader protections than those provided by the U.S. Constitution, serving as a crucial defense against attacks on our fundamental rights. Make a plan to vote in the April 7 election at MyVote.WI.Gov.

The Trump administration's Department of Justice has taken Kentucky to court in an attempt to obtain sensitive, non-public information from the state's voter registration database — including Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, dates of birth, and home addresses. This lawsuit is one of nearly three dozen similar actions filed against states across the country, and reporting suggests the underlying goal is to construct an unauthorized federal voter database and use error-prone data-matching tools to target registered voters — including naturalized citizens — for potential removal from the rolls.