Defendant Deidre M. Henderson, in her official capacity as Lieutenant
Governor of the State of Utah, respectfully moves this Court to dismiss Plaintiff
United States’s Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6); DUCivR 7-1(a). The basis
for this motion is that Plaintiff has not alleged facts stating a claim for relief under
Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960.
INTRODUCTION
Federalism and the separation of powers are the central features of our
constitutional order. The Framers envisioned a robust system of dual sovereignty in
which the States maintained a strong independent role—including in running
elections. For that reason, “the Constitution grants to the States a broad power to
prescribe the ‘Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and
Representatives.’” Tashjian v. Republican Party of Connecticut, 479 U.S. 208, 217
(1986) (quoting U.S. Const. art. I, § 4, cl. 1). The Constitution also allows Congress a
role in the electoral process—specifically, that of “establishing uniform rules for
federal elections, binding on the States,” where necessary. Foster v. Love, 522 U.S.
67, 69 (1997). But on a fundamental level, it is the States that wield the
“constitutional power to prescribe rules regulating federal elections.” Moore v.
Harper, 600 U.S. 1, 27 (2023); see also Foster, 522 U.S. at 69.
Plaintiff now aims to upset that balance. In this litigation—as in 29 similar
lawsuits against other States and the District of Columbia, none of which have yet
been successful—the executive branch of the federal government claims the power
to compel the State of Utah (“the State” or “Utah”) to hand over sensitive personal
information belonging to millions of Utah voters. For support, it cites the Civil
Rights Act of 1960 (CRA)—a 66-year-old statute under which it has “never
previously claimed powers of this magnitude” before. Biden v. Nebraska, 600 U.S.
477, 501 (2023). Plaintiff reads this statute to confer a “sweeping power to obtain”
state voting records, requiring States to ignore their own voter privacy laws in the
process. Dkt. 1 (“Compl.”) ¶ 2.
Plaintiff is mistaken. The CRA does not require Utah to hand over its own
internal voting rolls, which the State created for its own purposes, and which are
not “records” that have “come into [its] possession” as the statute specifies. 52
U.S.C. § 20701. The CRA does not prohibit Utah from redacting sensitive voter
information, as required by State law. And it does not authorize the federal
government to sidestep Congress’s unambiguous requirement that the federal
government provide a valid statement of “the basis and the purpose” for its votingrecord request. 52 U.S.C. § 20703
NEW: Lt. Governor Henderson (through her lawyers) have asked a federal judge to throw out the DOJ's lawsuit seeking Utah voter records. Essentially, argument is federalism and DOJ is not entitled to them nor can they require states to ignore their own voter privacy laws. #utpol #Utah