399 F.Supp.3d 425
D. Maryland2019Background
- Judicial Watch (plaintiff), a D.C. nonprofit, sent statutory NVRA notice (Apr. 11, 2017) requesting Montgomery County voter registration records/lists and warned of suit if noncompliance. State Board of Elections acknowledged and compiled responsive documents but refused to produce the Montgomery County voter list to Judicial Watch because Maryland Election Law §3-506 limits voter-list access to Maryland registered voters.
- Judicial Watch sued Maryland election officials under the NVRA, 52 U.S.C. §20507(i)(1), seeking the county voter list (fields: name, DOB, address, most recent activity, active/inactive status) and contending NVRA preempts the Maryland restriction.
- Defendants argued a voter “list” is not a §8(i) record (only individual registration records are), that producing a list would create a new record/index, and that Maryland law limiting access to in-state registered voters is permissible/not preempted.
- The parties cross-moved for summary judgment after discovery; the Court considered statutory text, Fourth Circuit precedent (Project Vote v. Long), and FOIA/database authorities.
- The Court held that individual voter registrations are §8(i) records and that a voter list is a compilation/subset of those records and therefore falls within §8(i)’s disclosure mandate; Maryland’s §3-506(a)(1) restriction (limiting lists only to Maryland voters) is obstacle-preempted to the extent it blocks out-of-state organizations like Judicial Watch.
- The Court denied production of birthdates pending further briefing due to privacy/identity-theft concerns but ordered production of the list with name, address, most recent voter activity, and active/inactive status; summary judgment granted in part for plaintiff and cross-motion denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a county "voter list" is a "record concerning the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of official lists of eligible voters" under NVRA §8(i)(1) | Judicial Watch: A voter list is simply a compilation of individual voter registrations (which are §8(i) records), so lists must be producible under §8(i). | State: A voter list is a descriptive index/partial extract, not a record used in maintenance programs; producing it would create a new record outside §8(i). | Held: Voter registrations are §8(i) records; a voter list is a pared-down compilation of those records and falls within §8(i). |
| Whether Maryland Election Law §3-506(a)(1) (restricting voter-list access to Maryland registered voters) is preempted by the NVRA | Judicial Watch: §3-506(a)(1) frustrates NVRA purposes by barring organizations and non-Maryland voters from access; it's obstacle preempted. | State: NVRA permits reasonable state limitations on public inspection; Maryland’s restriction protects resident privacy and integrity. | Held: §3-506(a)(1) is obstacle preempted insofar as it limits access to voter lists only to Maryland registered voters; NVRA disclosure prevails. |
| Whether the State must produce date-of-birth data with the voter list | Judicial Watch: DOB helps detect duplicates/fraud and is part of requested registration data. | State: DOB plus name raises identity-theft/privacy risks; state can limit sensitive fields. | Held: Court reserved on DOB; declined to order production without further briefing on privacy vs. NVRA disclosure (issue left open). |
| Whether the State may refuse to produce records older than two years under §8(i) | State: Suggested only records involved in maintenance in last two years are required. | Judicial Watch: §8(i) requires preservation for at least two years but does not limit production to records created/used within two years; older records concerning implementation must be producible. | Held: §8(i) requires retention for at least two years but does not limit production to records under two years; older records that concern implementation must be produced if retained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Project Vote/Voting for Am., Inc. v. Long, 682 F.3d 331 (4th Cir. 2012) (voter registration applications fall within NVRA §8(i) disclosure mandate)
- Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., 570 U.S. 1 (2013) (Elections Clause context: read federal election statutes to mean what they say regarding preemption)
- National Sec. Counselors v. CIA, 898 F. Supp. 2d 233 (D.D.C. 2012) (database sorting/compilation requests do not necessarily require creation of new records for FOIA purposes)
- Fusaro v. Cogan, 930 F.3d 241 (4th Cir. 2019) (voter-registration list as a form of political communication implicating First Amendment considerations)