By Michael Phillips | MDBayNews

---

Maryland’s election system is now the target of two major federal lawsuits, filed just days apart — one by the Republican National Committee and Maryland GOP, the other by the U.S. Department of Justice under Attorney General Pam Bondi. Though they attack different aspects of the system, both cases center on the same issue: whether Maryland is meeting its legal obligations to maintain accurate voter rolls and provide transparency to federal overseers.

Depending on how the courts rule, these cases could reshape how Maryland maintains voter records ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Here is the updated, right-of-center but fact-driven analysis — now incorporating all available data, legal precedents, and federal reporting.

---

Two Lawsuits, One Target: Maryland’s Voter Rolls

1. RNC / Maryland GOP Lawsuit (Filed December 5, 2025)

The RNC, Maryland GOP, and individual Republican voters sued state and county election officials alleging that Maryland’s voter rolls show “impossibly high” registration rates in multiple counties — in violation of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).

Based on Census-derived estimates of the voting-age citizen population (not total population), the complaint states:

• Howard County — registration exceeds 100%
• Montgomery County — also exceeds 100%
• Ten additional counties — exceed 95% of their estimated voting-age citizen populations

The lawsuit also relies on Maryland’s 2023 Legislative Audit, which identified:

• 2,426 potential deceased voters still appearing in the system
• 327 potential duplicate registrations
• Weak follow-through on list-maintenance responsibilities by the State Board of Elections

The RNC argues these findings show Maryland is not meeting NVRA’s requirement that states make “reasonable efforts” to keep rolls current and remove ineligible registrants.

The plaintiffs are seeking:

• A court-supervised audit
• Removal of ineligible registrations
• Expanded data access for independent review

Crucially, the lawsuit does not allege mass fraud — only administrative noncompliance and inflated registration lists.

---

2. DOJ Lawsuit (Filed December 2, 2025)

Three days earlier, the Department of Justice filed United States v. DeMarinis, alleging Maryland unlawfully refused to supply the federal government with a complete, unredacted statewide voter-registration database. DOJ is seeking:

• Names
• Addresses
• Dates of birth
• Driver’s-license identifiers
• Last four digits of Social Security numbers

Maryland provided only its public, redacted voter roll, citing state privacy laws and risks of voter intimidation.

DOJ argues this refusal violates:

• The Civil Rights Act of 1960 (gives DOJ authority to inspect election records)
• The NVRA (requires rolls to be open for federal oversight)
• HAVA (requires an accurate statewide database with unique identifiers)

The DOJ is asking a federal judge to compel production and permit ongoing federal monitoring.

---

Maryland’s Defense — and Voting-Rights Concerns

Maryland election officials argue that releasing partial SSNs, driver’s-license numbers, and similar identifiers would violate state law and create unacceptable risks of:

• Identity theft
• Targeted harassment
• Exposure of sensitive information about immigrants and minority communities

Voting-rights groups echo these concerns and note that in similar DOJ cases involving California and New Mexico, courts have already indicated they may limit disclosure or require stringent protective orders.

---

A Key Neutral Data Point: The EAC’s 2024 Federal Report

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) — a neutral federal agency — reported in 2024 that Maryland:

• Had the 5th-highest percentage of registrations classified as inactive in the nation
• Removed fewer inactive or outdated registrations than the national average

These findings do not prove illegality or fraud. But they significantly weaken Maryland’s argument that its maintenance program is already meeting NVRA’s “reasonable efforts” standard.

---

How Strong Is the RNC / Maryland GOP Case?

Strengths

1. The statutory duty is real
NVRA does impose mandatory maintenance obligations, and the 2023 audit provides concrete evidence of deficiencies.

2. The numbers raise legitimate questions
Two counties over 100% registration of voting-age citizens — and ten more above 95% — are difficult for any court to wave away.

3. The complaint is better constructed than past attempts
Including named voters and party committees makes the standing argument stronger than previous Maryland suits.

---

Biggest Weakness: The 4th Circuit’s Standing Doctrine

Here is the most serious vulnerability:

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears appeals from Maryland, has been consistently hostile to vote-dilution standing arguments. In February 2025, it affirmed dismissal of a nearly identical Maryland case, ruling that:

• Concerns about inaccurate rolls
• Without evidence that ineligible registrants actually voted
• Are “generalized grievances,” not concrete injuries

Legal analysts note that, despite the RNC’s improved framing, the state will almost certainly move to dismiss on standing — and the 4th Circuit’s precedent makes that a real threat.

---

How Strong Is the DOJ Case?

The DOJ case is significantly stronger because:

1. Standing is automatic

The federal government does not need to show injury the way private plaintiffs do.

2. The Civil Rights Act explicitly grants record-inspection authority

Courts have consistently upheld this power.

3. Maryland admits it denied full access

The dispute is over whether it was lawful, not whether it happened.

Limitations

Courts may:

• Restrict certain fields
• Require protective orders
• Order redaction rather than full release

But a partial DOJ victory is the most likely outcome.

---

How the Two Lawsuits Interact

The RNC and DOJ cases function as two stages of the same pressure campaign:

• If DOJ gains access, any inaccuracies uncovered could strengthen the RNC suit and blunt standing challenges.
• If Maryland successfully limits DOJ access, it weakens the factual basis for sweeping RNC relief.

---

A Necessary Clarification to Prevent Misinterpretation

No court has ever interpreted the NVRA to require zero error rates or the removal of lawful but inactive voters. The question is simply whether Maryland’s efforts are “reasonable” under the statute — a standard that both the 2023 audit and the EAC’s 2024 data suggest may not currently be met.

---

Bottom Line for Maryland Voters

These lawsuits are not about relitigating past elections or alleging massive fraud. They are about:

• Transparency
• Compliance with federal law
• Whether Maryland’s voter-maintenance program meets the NVRA’s minimum standards

Based on past cases, the most likely outcomes are:

• DOJ wins partial or full access to the statewide voter file
• The RNC wins some incremental transparency or cleanup, but not a dramatic purge
• Maryland faces tightened compliance requirements before the 2026 midterms

MDBayNews will continue monitoring developments as both cases move through federal court.

---

Keep MDBayNews Reporting Free

MDBayNews exists to help Marylanders understand decisions made by state and local leaders — especially when those decisions affect daily life, rights, and public services.

If this article helped clarify what’s happening or why it matters, reader support makes it possible to keep publishing clear, independent reporting like this.

👉 Support Local Journalism

Have a tip or documents to share?

We review submissions carefully and confidentially. Anonymous tips are welcome when appropriate.

 👉 Submit a Tip