Does the 1960 civil rights law entitle the U.S. to Virginia's voter list?
The district court said no and dismissed the suit with prejudice. The government's appeal is fully briefed, with argument tentatively set for January 2027.
Koski and the intervening groups ask the court to dismiss the suit
Argued the voter list is not a record the law covers, and that the demand gave no factual basis and a contrived purpose.
The NAACP and its Virginia conference also argued the list falls outside the law's records requirement.
Common Cause and voter Katherine Ellena made the same scope argument in their own motion.
Argued the law reaches all election records, including the list, and that ordinary civil-case rules do not apply to its demand.
Each defendant group filed a reply supporting its motion.
Held the law covers records officials receive, not a list they build and update, and dismissed with prejudice. It did not reach the other arguments.
The United States asks the Fourth Circuit to reverse the dismissal
Argued the list is a covered record, that courts may not second-guess the demand's purpose, and that privacy laws do not allow withholding it.
Koski, the NAACP, and Common Cause with Ellena each filed a brief defending the dismissal.
The court accepted briefs from the DNC and from four civil rights groups supporting the defendants.
Tentatively calendared oral argument for its January 26-29, 2027 session.
Filed its reply, noting related Fourth Circuit appeals from Maryland and West Virginia.
Next step: Oral argument (tentative)
Should the court order Virginia to produce its voter list now?No: denied with the dismissal ·
The United States asked for an order to produce the list. The court denied it alongside the dismissal, since it sought the same relief for the same reasons.
The United States asks the court to compel production of the voter list
Asked the court to order Koski to produce the full voter list and other records it had demanded.
Koski, Common Cause with Ellena, and the NAACP each opposed the request.
Filed a reply supporting its request.
Denied it because it sought the same relief as the dismissed claim, and declined to order unspecified other records.
Can civil rights groups and a voter join the case as defendants?Yes: both groups allowed in ·
The NAACP groups and Common Cause with voter Katherine Ellena asked to join. Koski did not oppose, and the court allowed both groups in.
The NAACP and Common Cause ask to join the case as defendants
The NAACP and its Virginia conference asked to defend the case alongside the state.
Common Cause and voter Katherine Ellena asked to join, attaching a proposed motion to dismiss.
After the court asked for his position, Koski said he did not oppose either motion.
Allowed both groups to join as defendants under the permissive intervention rule.
Should Koski get more time to respond to the amended complaint?Partly: a shorter extension ·
Koski asked for more time and the United States responded. The court gave a shorter extension, setting May 19, 2026 for his response.
Koski asks for more time to answer the amended complaint
Asked for more time to respond to the amended complaint.
Filed a response to the request.
Granted a modest extension: a response by May 19 and an answer to the records request by May 26, 2026.