2026-10-09T20:47:20.112Z / 美国有线电视新闻网(CNN)
一名联邦法官指责司法部试图通过一项选民名册审计计划颠覆民权法律,该计划将“肆意践踏为保护美国民众权利精心制定的长期法律”。
美国地区法官斯帕克尔·苏克南安作出的最新裁决叫停了司法部获取非公开数据、审计几乎所有州选民名册的大规模项目,这是唐纳德·特朗普总统将联邦政府介入选举管理的努力遭遇的重大法律挫折。
这份长达78页的意见书严厉抨击了本届政府调整司法部、特别是其民权司工作重点的做法。
她将特朗普第二任期内发生重大变革的民权司描述为历史上“站在联邦政府保护美国人投票权努力的最前沿”。
去年特朗普重返白宫后,司法部放弃了多起备受关注的投票权案件,政治任命官员将该部门的职业工作人员排挤出局。过去一年来,投票部门的大部分公开工作都集中在获取州选民名册,以查找非公民选民——这长期以来都是特朗普关于大规模选举欺诈言论的执念。
“几十年来,民权司的律师和工作人员一直致力于保护这项权利——这是一项神圣的权利,让我们的公民能够参与政府治理,并保护所有其他个人权利免受政府干预,”由总统乔·拜登任命的苏克南安写道。
“在此背景下,本案实属反常,”苏克南安补充道。
她得出结论称,特朗普政府在要求各州提供非公开选民数据时违反了联邦法律,其目的是查找名册上被指称的非公民选民,随后指示各州将其从名册中移除。
“受到质疑的政策代表着联邦政府试图决定谁有权投票,”苏克南安写道。“但国会将这项权力保留在了我们的宪法一贯归属的地方:各州。”
https://www.cnn.com/
司法部长托德·布兰奇将在法院裁决后继续推进邮寄投票改革
苏克南安的裁决直接叫停了司法部的选民名单审查计划,此前多个州成功抵御了司法部索要敏感选民数据的诉讼。
根据本案提交的文件,尽管大多数州拒绝提供未编辑的选民名册,但至少有18个州向司法部提交了登记记录。目前尚不清楚司法部在获取这些数据后采取了什么行动。
苏克南安的裁决依据是司法部在向各州提供的、鼓励其提交名册的协议中加入的条款。这些协议称,在司法部完成审计后,各州将被要求在45天内“清理”其选民名册。
法官于周五得出结论,国会并未授予司法部指导各州清理选民名册的权力。司法部曾援引两部管辖选民登记某些方面的联邦法律以及1960年《民权法》来为其数据收集行为辩护。
“他们错了,”苏克南安周五写道。“事实上,如果认定这些投票保护法授权了司法部前所未有的行动,那将是对这些法律的彻底颠覆。”
她的裁决指出,她与其他25名地区法官持相同立场,这些法官在司法部针对拒不合作州提起的诉讼中裁定,《民权法》并未赋予该机构索要选民记录的权力。
该法律赋予司法部长特定的调查权力,以应对吉姆·克劳时代的投票限制,苏克南安表示,司法部对该法律的论点将“颠覆”其文本。
她写道,“被告方还提出了其他令人震惊的主张。”
“他们暗示,每一位登记投票的美国公民都正处于民权司发起的选民欺诈调查中,仅仅因为他们登记投票,”她说。
在此次审查中,政府计划将选民名册与一个名为SAVE——即“外侨身份验证系统”——的公民身份记录数据库以及其他联邦数据库进行比对,以查找不合格选民。
但本案的原告——选民维权组织“共同事业”以及一些个人选民指出,SAVE系统以产生假阳性结果而闻名。他们辩称,数据的收集和审查会抑制政治参与——特别是对归化公民而言,由于有缺陷的数据匹配,他们更有可能被错误调查,并且这将导致合格选民被错误地从名册中移除。这些选民还声称,数据的泄露侵犯了他们的隐私权。
苏克南安在另一起案件中曾得出结论,政府在调整SAVE数据计划以更积极地用于选民清理时违反了联邦隐私保护规定。然而,最高法院最近推翻了该项裁决,恢复了该计划,允许各州自愿使用该系统来核实选民的公民身份。
司法部未回应CNN就这项新裁决置评的请求。
“共同事业”主席兼首席执行官弗吉尼亚·凯斯·索洛蒙在一份声明中表示,这是“选民的胜利,也是司法部的又一次失败”。
“现在是特朗普政府停止这些不顾一切地试图获取选民私人数据、掌控我们选举的企图的时候了,”她说。
Justice Department ran ‘roughshod’ over civil rights with plans to audit state voter rolls, judge says
2026-10-09T20:47:20.112Z / CNN
A federal judge accused the Justice Department of trying to subvert civil rights laws with a voter roll audit plan that would run “roughshod over longstanding laws that were carefully crafted to protect the rights of the American people.”
The new ruling from US District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan halts the department’s sweeping project to obtain non-public data and audit nearly every state’s voter rolls, a major legal setback to President Donald Trump’s effort to insert the federal government into election administration.
Her 78-page opinion is a stinging rebuke of how the administration has shifted the priorities of the Justice Department, specifically its Civil Rights Division.
She described the division, which has been dramatically transformed during Trump’s second term, as historically standing at “the forefront of the federal government’s efforts to protect Americans’ right to vote.”
When Trump returned to the White House last year, the DOJ abandoned several high-profile voting rights cases as political appointees pushed out career staff from the division. For the last year, much of the public work of the voting section has been focused on obtaining state voter rolls in a hunt for non-citizen voters—which has long been a fixation of Trump’s mass election fraud beliefs.
“Generations of Civil Rights Division attorneys and staff have worked to protect that right – a sacred right that gives our citizenry a say in its government and secures all other individual rights against government interference,” wrote Sooknanan, who was appointed to the bench by President Joe Biden.
“Against that backdrop, this case is anomalous,” Sooknanan added.
She concluded that the Trump administration violated federal laws in how it demanded that states produce non-public voter data, for the purposes of finding alleged non-citizens on the rolls and then instructing states to remove them.
“The challenged policy represents the federal government’s attempt to decide who gets to vote,” Sooknanan wrote. “But Congress has left that authority where our Constitution has always placed it: with the states.”
https://www.cnn.com/
Attorney General Todd Blanche to pursue mail-in voting reforms even after Court ruling
Sooknanan’s order blocks the Justice Department’s voter list review program head-on, after several states have had success in fending off lawsuits from the administration that sought their sensitive voter data.
While most states resisted turning over their unredacted rolls, at least 18 states have produced the registration records to the Justice Department, according to filings in the case. It is unclear what the administration has done with the data since obtaining it.
Sooknanan’s ruling leans on language the DOJ inserted into agreements it offered states to encourage them to produce their rolls. The agreements said that after the department completed its audit, states would then be required to “clean” their rolls within 45 days.
The judge concluded Friday that Congress did not give the administration the power to direct state voter roll purges. The Justice Department had pointed to two federal laws that govern certain aspects of voter registration, as well as to the 1960 Civil Rights Act, to justify its data-collection.
“They are wrong,” Sooknanan wrote Friday. “In fact, it would turn these voter-protection laws on their head to find that they authorize DOJ’s unprecedented actions.”
Her ruling noted that she was joining 25 other district judges who have ruled in lawsuits DOJ brought against recalcitrant states in finding that the Civil Rights Act did not empower the agency the voter records it was seeking.
The law gave the attorney general certain investigatory powers to respond to Jim Crow-era voter restrictions, and Sooknanan said that the DOJ’s arguments about the law would “subvert” its text.
She wrote that “the Defendants make other startling arguments.”
“They suggest that every American citizen who registers to vote is the subject of a voter fraud investigation underway in the Civil Rights Division simply because they registered to vote,” she said.
For the review, the administration planned on comparing the voter rolls with a citizenship records data system known as SAVE – or Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements – well as with other federal databases, in a hunt for ineligible voters.
However, the plaintiffs in the case – the voter advocacy group Common Cause, as well as some individual voters – noted that SAVE has a reputation for producing false positives. They argued that the collection and review of the data was chilling political participation – particularly for naturalized citizens, who were more likely to be wrongfully investigated because of the flawed data matches – and that it would lead to mistaken removals of eligible voters from the rolls. The voters also alleged their privacy rights were violated by the disclosure of the data.
Sooknanan, in a separate case, had concluded the administration had violated federal privacy protections in how it revamped the SAVE data program to be used more aggressively in voter purges. However, the Supreme Court recently reversed that ruling, reviving that program for states to use voluntarily to verify voters’ citizenship status.
The Justice Department did not respond to CNN’s inquiry about the new ruling.
Common Cause President and CEO Virginia Kase Solomón said in a statement that it was “victory for voters and yet another loss for the Department of Justice.”
“It’s time the Trump administration stop these desperate attempts to seize voters’ private data and take control of our elections,” she said.
发表回复