DOJ delay tactics aim to advance Trump’s voter suppression schemes

In August, Democrats sued the Trump administration for any records detailing plans to seize ballots, voting machines or other election materials during the 2026 midterms. 

Over a month later, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has yet to formally respond to the suit. In fact, in a recent filing, the department told a federal judge it needed over a month more — until just a week before Election Day — to answer.

DOJ attorneys claim the request was filed in good faith. But lawyers for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) allege that the department may be attempting to run out the clock, potentially to avoid disclosing possible preparation to interfere in elections this November.

“The Department of Justice … cannot nullify the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) through persistent delay,” the party’s attorneys said in a recent motion opposing the DOJ’s request. They noted that the department failed to name an attorney in the case for three weeks.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, a Clinton nominee overseeing the DNC’s FOIA suit, rejected the DOJ’s request Monday and required it to respond by next Monday. She said she could not move the deadline to Oct. 28, as DOJ’s attorneys asked, “given the potential risk for prejudice” to the DNC.

But that request was not the only instance this week when the DOJ asked courts for delays in lawsuits concerning President Donald Trump’s attempts, or potential attempts, to disrupt the upcoming midterms.

In a separate suit challenging the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) creation of state-specific voter eligibility lists, the DOJ also asked a federal judge in Maryland to postpone a crucial hearing this week.

The hearing, set for Friday, concerns the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s (EPIC) request for U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis to declare DHS’s actions unlawful. However, citing upcoming deadlines in other lawsuits and religious obligations, DOJ attorneys asked Xinis to cancel or delay the hearing for two weeks.

The judge promptly denied that request “given the time sensitive nature of the claims raised and the need for an expedited review.”

DHS has said it plans to release the voter eligibility lists for all 50 states before the midterms — a move that stems from Trump’s March 2026 anti-voting executive order, in which he directed DHS to create the lists using data held by agencies across the federal government.

The Trump administration has not given states guidance on what they are expected to do with the lists, nor has it said how absence from the lists could affect voters. But voting experts fear some states could use them to initiate voter-roll purges just weeks before voters head to the polls.

That could explain the DOJ’s attempts to delay a possible court order finding DHS’s creation of the lists illegal.

Alongside her rejection, Xinis did offer the DOJ one small concession: She said she would be open to holding a virtual hearing Friday afternoon instead.