Federal judges, appointed by both Democrats and Republicans, have consistently ruled against the Justice Department's efforts to acquire sensitive voter information. This comes as the DOJ has sued 30 U.S. states and D.C. to obtain these records. The administration sought this data to support President Trump's claims of widespread election fraud. A key ruling by U.S. District Judge Philip Brimmer dismissed the DOJ's case against Colorado, stating the Civil Rights Act did not grant such authority. Across twenty cases, judges have denied the DOJ's requests, with some calling them "unprecedented and illegal." A Trump appointee in Rhode Island described the request as a "fishing expedition." An appeals court also handed the DOJ a significant loss in this campaign. Conversely, numerous states have voluntarily shared some voter data, while others only provided publicly available information. The DOJ's pursuit of voter data is part of broader election-related pressures from the administration. These efforts have faced challenges, including the unsubstantiated claims about unauthorized immigrants on voting rolls. Despite these setbacks, the DOJ has obtained some individual voter files through other means, such as through ICE investigations.