Must Maryland produce its voter list, or should the lawsuit be dismissed?
The district court refused to order the list produced and dismissed the case with prejudice in June 2026. The United States appealed; argument is tentatively set for January 2027.
The United States asks the court to order Maryland to hand over its voter list
Right after suing, the government asked the court to order DeMarinis to produce Maryland's full voter list under the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
DeMarinis and both intervenor groups opposed and moved to dismiss, arguing the 1960 law does not reach the list and the demand gave no adequate basis.
- Docket entry 35 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 51 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 34 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 71 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 43 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 36 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 49 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 50 (opens the public source in a new tab)
The government argued the case is a special proceeding not open to dismissal motions, citing a May 2026 Justice Department legal opinion.
Each defendant group replied and later filed rulings from other courts that had dismissed similar suits.
- Docket entry 58 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 59 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 60 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 65 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 67 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 85 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 83 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 84 (opens the public source in a new tab)
The docket records a June 10, 2026 hearing on the three motions to dismiss.
The court held the voter list is not a record the 1960 law makes states produce, denied the motion, and dismissed the case with prejudice.
The United States asks the Fourth Circuit to reverse the dismissal
The government appealed the dismissal and the denial of its motion, arguing the list is a covered record and must be produced unredacted.
DeMarinis, the Alliance, and the Common Cause group each filed briefs asking the court to affirm.
- Docket entry 45 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 54 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 46 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 47 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 52 (opens the public source in a new tab)
- Docket entry 56 (opens the public source in a new tab)
The government filed its reply brief supporting reversal.
The court tentatively placed the case on its January 26–29, 2027 in-person argument session in Richmond.
Next step: Oral argument (tentative)
Should the Fourth Circuit speed up the appeal?No: normal schedule kept ·
The government asked for a faster appeal; after the defendants responded, the Fourth Circuit refused in August 2026 and kept the normal schedule.
The United States asks the Fourth Circuit to expedite the appeal
The government asked the court to speed up processing and decision of the appeal.
At the court's request, DeMarinis opposed the motion and both intervenor groups filed responses.
The government replied to the three responses.
The court denied the motion and kept briefing and argument on the normal schedule.
May voter groups and Maryland voters join the case as defendants?Yes: both groups may intervene ·
The court let the Maryland/DC Alliance for Retired Americans, and separately Common Cause, Out for Justice, and three voters, intervene in February 2026.
Two groups of voter advocates ask to join the case as defendants
The Maryland/DC Alliance for Retired Americans asked to join the case to defend against the demand.
Common Cause, Out for Justice, and voters Carl Snowden, Myriam Paul, and Luis Sims asked to join, attaching a proposed motion to dismiss.
The court granted both motions to intervene on February 2, 2026.