Campaign Legal Center, on behalf of Justice Connection, filed briefs in two cases — California Nurses Association v. Mullin and Service Employees International Union v. U.S. Department of Justice — seeking to prevent voter and election official intimidation and coercion.
Back to topAll voters have the right to cast their ballots without fear or intimidation. That protection extends to all forms of voting, including by mail, during early voting or in person on Election Day.
Is voter intimidation illegal?
Yes, voter intimidation is illegal under federal law. Specifically, Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act states that it...
Campaign Legal Center, representing Justice Connection, filed amicus briefs in two cases challenging federal actions that threaten voters and election officials ahead of Election Day: California Nurses Association (CNA) v. Mullin, involving DHS's blocked door-to-door voter investigation program targeting naturalized citizens, and Service Employees International Union (SEIU) v. U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), involving DOJ intimidation and coercion of election officials.
Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act prohibits intimidation, threats and coercion against voters and those assisting voters, and courts have long recognized its broad protections. The law applies to government officials as well as private individuals and does not require proof of intent to intimidate.
California Nurses Association v. Mullin: In California Nurses Association v. Mullin, a federal district court blocked a voter-investigation program that included door-to-door operations targeting naturalized citizens in the weeks before Election Day.
After the court issued its injunction, the Trump administration asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to reinstate the program. CLC and Justice Connection filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit, urging the court to keep the program blocked and protect voters from government-sponsored intimidation.
SEIU v. DOJ: In SEIU v. DOJ, the plaintiffs in this case allege that the DOJ issued subpoenas, demands and threats of criminal prosecution in the leadup to the 2026 elections that create an atmosphere of intimidation that interferes with election administration. A federal court issued an order preventing the DOJ from threatening state and local election officials with criminal consequences if they do not accede to unsubstantiated demands by the federal government.
The DOJ asked the Ninth Circuit to pause both district courts’ rulings. CLC and Justice Connection filed amicus briefs in both courts supporting the lower courts’ orders arguing that election officials must be able to administer elections free from unlawful threats and government intimidation.
In both cases, CLC argues that the federal government has historically enforced laws preventing voter intimidation, not engaged in conduct that chills participation in our democracy. Our briefs highlight how efforts by federal agencies to intimidate voters and election officials stand in stark contrast to the longstanding role of the U.S. Department of Justice in safeguarding our elections. We urge the courts to protect voters, uphold the rule of law, and ensure that federal power is not used to interfere with democratic participation.
