Should the government's suit for Washington's voter list be dismissed?
The judge dismissed the suit with prejudice in September 2026. The United States appealed to the Ninth Circuit on October 30, 2026.
Secretary Hobbs and the voting groups ask the court to dismiss the suit
The Secretary argued the 1960 law does not cover the voter list and, alternatively, that handing it over would violate state and federal law.
Common Cause with Washington Conservation Action, and Common Power with the Alliance for Retired Americans, filed their own motions.
Judge Evanson heard argument on the motions to dismiss and the motion to compel and took them under advisement.
The government argued the list came into the Secretary's possession when officials created it, so the law reaches it.
The Secretary and both groups of intervenors replied in support of dismissal.
The judge held the law covers records that come into officials' hands, not a constantly updated list they create, and dismissed with prejudice.
The United States appeals the dismissal to the Ninth Circuit
The government appealed the dismissal order and judgment to the Ninth Circuit.
Should Washington be ordered to produce its full voter list?
The government asked the court to order the list produced. The court denied that request as moot when it dismissed the suit.
The United States asks the court to compel production of the voter list
The government asked for an order requiring the Secretary to produce the unredacted list within five days.
The Secretary and the voting groups opposed the request in their combined motions to dismiss.
The government's combined brief replied in support of its request.
Having dismissed the suit, the judge denied the request to compel as moot.
Should four voting-rights groups be allowed to join the case?Yes: the four groups joined the case ·
Four groups asked to join on the Secretary's side. The court let them in over the government's opposition in May 2026.
Common Power asks to join before the Secretary is served
Common Power asked to join the case as a defendant.
The court terminated the motion without prejudice until the government proved it had served the Secretary.
Four voting groups ask to join the case to defend
Common Power with the Alliance for Retired Americans, and Common Cause with Washington Conservation Action, each moved to join.
The Secretary did not oppose the groups joining.
The government argued the groups raised only a general grievance and should participate as friends of the court instead.
Both groups of applicants replied in support of joining.
The judge allowed the groups to join, finding they could speak to their members' privacy interests more directly than the Secretary.
Should the suit be dismissed for lack of timely service?No: orders lifted after proof of service ·
The court twice ordered the government to prove it had served the Secretary. After proof of service, the court lifted both orders.
The court asks the United States to show it served the Secretary
The magistrate judge ordered proof of timely service or an explanation why the suit should not be dismissed.
The government filed proof of service and a response to the order.
Judge Evanson lifted both show-cause orders because proof of service had been filed.