Civil Rights Case Docket | Southern Poverty Law Center /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/ Thu, 14 May 2026 22:27:48 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 McElroy, et al. v. Houston County, Alabama, et al. /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/mcelroy-v-houston-county/ Fri, 15 May 2026 13:30:00 +0000 /?post_type=splc_case&p=175937

On May 13, 2026, attorneys with the Southern Poverty Law Center, Pregnancy Justice and Sullivan & Cromwell LLP filed a federal civil rights lawsuit in Alabama on behalf of Tiffany McElroy and her infant daughter.

In May 2024, McElroy was just days into her detention at the Houston County Jail in Dothan, Alabama, for a pregnancy-related charge when her water broke. McElroy has a history of preterm labor and was in her third trimester. She pleaded to be taken to a hospital, but the guards ignored her. She was left slipping in and out of consciousness from excruciating pain.

Over the course of more than 24 hours of labor, other detained women assisted McElroy. They also begged the guards to help, but were met with threats of lockdown, being written up or being tased. As McElroy’s contractions slowed and her pregnancy began to exhibit signs of distress, the women stepped in to deliver the newborn.

When Baby B.T. was finally born, limp and blue, the women resuscitated the baby. No jail staff offered McElroy or Baby B.T. immediate assistance. McElroy became unresponsive.

Guards eventually placed McElroy in a wheelchair and transported her and Baby B.T. to a hospital. McElroy stayed there for three days before being returned to the jail while Baby B.T. was placed in the neonatal intensive care unit. McElroy was diagnosed with anemia from acute blood loss and a potentially deadly infection.

After the delivery, a guard told the women, “Y’all should’ve pushed that m‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑ baby back in.” The jail also punished the women on the cell block. They were not allowed outside, were only allowed to leave their bunks to use the bathroom, were not permitted to attend religious services and their phone privileges were revoked.

The federal lawsuit allows McElroy and Baby B.T. to sue for violations of their constitutional rights and names Houston County, the Houston County Commission, the Houston County sheriff and more than a dozen jail staff as defendants. Among other claims, the suit asserts violations of McElroy’s and Baby B.T.’s 14th Amendment rights through deliberate indifference to their serious medical needs. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages.

The post McElroy, et al. v. Houston County, Alabama, et al. appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>

On May 13, 2026, attorneys with the Southern Poverty Law Center, Pregnancy Justice and Sullivan & Cromwell LLP filed a federal civil rights lawsuit in Alabama on behalf of Tiffany McElroy and her infant daughter.

In May 2024, McElroy was just days into her detention at the Houston County Jail in Dothan, Alabama, for a pregnancy-related charge when her water broke. McElroy has a history of preterm labor and was in her third trimester. She pleaded to be taken to a hospital, but the guards ignored her. She was left slipping in and out of consciousness from excruciating pain.

Over the course of more than 24 hours of labor, other detained women assisted McElroy. They also begged the guards to help, but were met with threats of lockdown, being written up or being tased. As McElroy’s contractions slowed and her pregnancy began to exhibit signs of distress, the women stepped in to deliver the newborn.

When Baby B.T. was finally born, limp and blue, the women resuscitated the baby. No jail staff offered McElroy or Baby B.T. immediate assistance. McElroy became unresponsive.

Guards eventually placed McElroy in a wheelchair and transported her and Baby B.T. to a hospital. McElroy stayed there for three days before being returned to the jail while Baby B.T. was placed in the neonatal intensive care unit. McElroy was diagnosed with anemia from acute blood loss and a potentially deadly infection.

After the delivery, a guard told the women, “Y’all should’ve pushed that m‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑ baby back in.” The jail also punished the women on the cell block. They were not allowed outside, were only allowed to leave their bunks to use the bathroom, were not permitted to attend religious services and their phone privileges were revoked.

The federal lawsuit allows McElroy and Baby B.T. to sue for violations of their constitutional rights and names Houston County, the Houston County Commission, the Houston County sheriff and more than a dozen jail staff as defendants. Among other claims, the suit asserts violations of McElroy’s and Baby B.T.’s 14th Amendment rights through deliberate indifference to their serious medical needs. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages.

The post McElroy, et al. v. Houston County, Alabama, et al. appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>
Association for the Preservation of the Eatonville Community, Inc. v. School Board of Orange County, Florida /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/association-preservation-eatonville-community-v-school-board-orange-county-florida/ Wed, 01 Apr 2026 22:22:00 +0000 /?post_type=splc_case&p=174644

The Southern Poverty Law Center has filed a new lawsuit against the school board of Orange County, Florida, on behalf of the Association to Preserve the Eatonville Community, Inc. (PEC) to protect the Robert Hungerford Preparatory High School property.

 The lawsuit alleges that the Orange County School Board is selling that historic land after secret negotiations in violation of Florida’s Government in the Sunshine Law.

During a meeting on January 13, 2026, the school board voted unanimously to approve the sale of the Hungerford property in Eatonville to Dr. Phillips Inc./The Dr. P. Phillips Foundation Inc. The board had already entered into a memorandum of understanding that detailed the key terms of the sale of the Hungerford property to Dr. Phillips, which it approved on Sept. 30, 2025.

According to the lawsuit, the agreement to sell the land was already decided through closed-door meetings prior to any public discussions or formal votes.

The post Association for the Preservation of the Eatonville Community, Inc. v. School Board of Orange County, Florida appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>

The Southern Poverty Law Center has filed a new lawsuit against the school board of Orange County, Florida, on behalf of the Association to Preserve the Eatonville Community, Inc. (PEC) to protect the Robert Hungerford Preparatory High School property.

 The lawsuit alleges that the Orange County School Board is selling that historic land after secret negotiations in violation of Florida’s Government in the Sunshine Law.

During a meeting on January 13, 2026, the school board voted unanimously to approve the sale of the Hungerford property in Eatonville to Dr. Phillips Inc./The Dr. P. Phillips Foundation Inc. The board had already entered into a memorandum of understanding that detailed the key terms of the sale of the Hungerford property to Dr. Phillips, which it approved on Sept. 30, 2025.

According to the lawsuit, the agreement to sell the land was already decided through closed-door meetings prior to any public discussions or formal votes.

The post Association for the Preservation of the Eatonville Community, Inc. v. School Board of Orange County, Florida appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>
Young, et al. v. Lee, et al. /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/young-et-al-v-lee-et-al/ Fri, 13 Feb 2026 17:41:58 +0000 /?post_type=splc_case&p=172699

The (Խ), the , the , the and the law firm of d filed a lawsuit challenging Tennessee’s universal voucher program on behalf of public school parents and community members who argue the law violates students’ constitutional right to an adequate and equitable education by diverting public funds to private schools.

Under the state’s voucher program, Tennessee public schools lose $7,295 per student to private schools that are not required to upholdthe same academic standards, transparency requirements or civil rights protections as public schools. This leaves families with less support and fewer protections and exacerbates existing inequalities. By diverting money from the state’s already underfunded schools to private institutions, the suit argues that the voucher program violates the Tennessee Constitution’s guarantee to provide students an adequate education through a “system of free public schools.”

The suit was filed in the Chancery Court for Davidson County, 20th Judicial Circuit. Plaintiffs are seeking a jury trial.

The post Young, et al. v. Lee, et al. appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>

The (Խ), the , the , the and the law firm of d filed a lawsuit challenging Tennessee’s universal voucher program on behalf of public school parents and community members who argue the law violates students’ constitutional right to an adequate and equitable education by diverting public funds to private schools.

Under the state’s voucher program, Tennessee public schools lose $7,295 per student to private schools that are not required to upholdthe same academic standards, transparency requirements or civil rights protections as public schools. This leaves families with less support and fewer protections and exacerbates existing inequalities. By diverting money from the state’s already underfunded schools to private institutions, the suit argues that the voucher program violates the Tennessee Constitution’s guarantee to provide students an adequate education through a “system of free public schools.”

The suit was filed in the Chancery Court for Davidson County, 20th Judicial Circuit. Plaintiffs are seeking a jury trial.

The post Young, et al. v. Lee, et al. appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>
Mills v. Connelly, et al. /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/mills-v-connelly/ Tue, 10 Feb 2026 18:06:07 +0000 /?post_type=splc_case&p=172824

The , along with the , the and the law firm of , provided legal representation to Nia Mills, a Black woman subjected to prolonged detention, extensive property searches and ongoing emotional harm when West Baton Rouge Parish sheriff’s deputies detained her after a 2021 traffic stop.

On March 26, 2021, Deputy William Allen Connelly stopped Nia Mills and her partner for a minor traffic violation. When Mills’ partner fled in fear, Connelly detained Mills roadside while deputies searched her purse and vehicle. Officers later transported her to the sheriff's narcotics office, where they conducted additional searches, which included her electronics. Several hours later, deputies allowed Mills to leave but seized all her bank cards and rental car and had arrested her partner.

Mills filed suit in the Middle District of Louisiana, alleging mistreatment by the officers. In November 2024, the district court denied the officers’ qualified immunity defense at summary judgment, permitting most of her claims to proceed to trial.

A settlement in the case was filed on Feb. 10, 2026.

The post Mills v. Connelly, et al. appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>

The , along with the , the and the law firm of , provided legal representation to Nia Mills, a Black woman subjected to prolonged detention, extensive property searches and ongoing emotional harm when West Baton Rouge Parish sheriff’s deputies detained her after a 2021 traffic stop.

On March 26, 2021, Deputy William Allen Connelly stopped Nia Mills and her partner for a minor traffic violation. When Mills’ partner fled in fear, Connelly detained Mills roadside while deputies searched her purse and vehicle. Officers later transported her to the sheriff’s narcotics office, where they conducted additional searches, which included her electronics. Several hours later, deputies allowed Mills to leave but seized all her bank cards and rental car and had arrested her partner.

Mills filed suit in the Middle District of Louisiana, alleging mistreatment by the officers. In November 2024, the district court denied the officers’ qualified immunity defense at summary judgment, permitting most of her claims to proceed to trial.

A settlement in the case was filed on Feb. 10, 2026.

The post Mills v. Connelly, et al. appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>
Cokely, et al. v. Honesty-Bey /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/cokely-v-honesty-bey/ Fri, 06 Feb 2026 15:37:09 +0000 /?post_type=splc_case&p=172369

The Southern Poverty Law Center filed a lawsuit against Prince George’s County, Maryland, over its 2021 council redistricting plan. The suit argues that the map is malapportioned, violating the U.S. Constitution’s “one person, one vote” principle, and fails to meet the county charter’s requirements for compact and equally populated districts. The suit, filed on behalf of several county residents, seeks to ensure that all voters have an equal voice in local government.

The complaint details how neighborhoods in Maryland’s inner beltway — where residents face challenges in housing, transportation and economic opportunity — were divided among eight of nine council districts, weakening their collective voice and dividing crucial communities of interest along Prince George’s County’s four Metrorail line segments. Meanwhile, outer beltway residents — struggling with clogged streets, strained public infrastructure and erosion of green spaces — have representatives who are not representing their unique interests.

The Խ argues that the current map leaves some residents considerably underrepresented while splitting communities that should be unified. It is seeking the court to order new, fairer district lines before the 2026 election cycle.

The case was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland Southern Division.

The post Cokely, et al. v. Honesty-Bey appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>

The Southern Poverty Law Center filed a lawsuit against Prince George’s County, Maryland, over its 2021 council redistricting plan. The suit argues that the map is malapportioned, violating the U.S. Constitution’s “one person, one vote” principle, and fails to meet the county charter’s requirements for compact and equally populated districts. The suit, filed on behalf of several county residents, seeks to ensure that all voters have an equal voice in local government.

The complaint details how neighborhoods in Maryland’s inner beltway — where residents face challenges in housing, transportation and economic opportunity — were divided among eight of nine council districts, weakening their collective voice and dividing crucial communities of interest along Prince George’s County’s four Metrorail line segments. Meanwhile, outer beltway residents — struggling with clogged streets, strained public infrastructure and erosion of green spaces — have representatives who are not representing their unique interests.

The Խ argues that the current map leaves some residents considerably underrepresented while splitting communities that should be unified. It is seeking the court to order new, fairer district lines before the 2026 election cycle.

The case was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland Southern Division.

The post Cokely, et al. v. Honesty-Bey appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>
Louisiana v. U.S. Department of Commerce /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/louisiana-v-us-department-commerce/ Mon, 02 Feb 2026 22:50:54 +0000 /?post_type=splc_case&p=171903

The (Խ) filed a motion to intervene in Louisiana v. U.S. Department of Commerce on behalf of the (LWV), the (LWVFL), and the (LWVNYS).

The lawsuit, filed by the plaintiff states of Louisiana, Kansas, Ohio, and West Virginia, aims to exclude people based on their citizenship status from the census count, which is used to assign congressional seats and Electoral College votes.

The purpose of the U.S. Census is to provide accurate data about the country’s economy and residents. Although the suit seeks to exclude undocumented persons and holders of temporary visas from the count, the Constitution and federal law require that all residents — irrespective of their citizenship status — are counted to ensure fair representation and equitable distribution of federal resources to states.

If the plaintiff states succeed, the government will have to penalize states with large immigrant populations, shrinking their congressional representation and electoral votes along with the federal funding tied to their population. Excluding millions of people from the census count would distort democracy and unfairly weaken the voting power of states with large immigrant populations.

The post Louisiana v. U.S. Department of Commerce appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>

The (Խ) filed a motion to intervene in Louisiana v. U.S. Department of Commerce on behalf of the (LWV), the (LWVFL), and the (LWVNYS).

The lawsuit, filed by the plaintiff states of Louisiana, Kansas, Ohio, and West Virginia, aims to exclude people based on their citizenship status from the census count, which is used to assign congressional seats and Electoral College votes.

The purpose of the U.S. Census is to provide accurate data about the country’s economy and residents. Although the suit seeks to exclude undocumented persons and holders of temporary visas from the count, the Constitution and federal law require that all residents — irrespective of their citizenship status — are counted to ensure fair representation and equitable distribution of federal resources to states.

If the plaintiff states succeed, the government will have to penalize states with large immigrant populations, shrinking their congressional representation and electoral votes along with the federal funding tied to their population. Excluding millions of people from the census count would distort democracy and unfairly weaken the voting power of states with large immigrant populations.

The post Louisiana v. U.S. Department of Commerce appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>
P.A., et al. v. St. Tammany Parish School Board, et al. /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/pa-v-st-tammany-parish-school-board/ Mon, 02 Feb 2026 20:55:13 +0000 /?post_type=splc_case&p=171886

The and the at Loyola University New Orleans filed an appeal challenging the decision of the St. Tammany Parish School Board in Louisiana severely limit a disabled student’s classroom instruction time and restrict their interactions with other students.

The appeal aims to reverse a Louisiana administrative law judge’s decision and asks a federal court to end a practice that unlawfully excludes children with disabilities from full access to public education.

St. Tammany Parish School District placed a 9-year-old autistic student in a classroom alone and limited them to two hours of in-school instruction per day. Following this, school officials sent the child home for the remainder of the day without education services, supports or interaction with their peers in violation of their civil rights and the . The student’s parents said the measure was not temporary or therapeutic, but an unlawful exclusion that denied the student their right to a free and appropriate public education guaranteed under federal law.

The case began in March 2025, when the Loyola Law Clinic challenged the policy through the administrative judicial process. After the administrative judge ruled against the student’s family, Loyola Law Clinic and the Խ filed an appeal with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana and sued the school district for disability discrimination.

The post P.A., et al. v. St. Tammany Parish School Board, et al. appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>

The and the at Loyola University New Orleans filed an appeal challenging the decision of the St. Tammany Parish School Board in Louisiana severely limit a disabled student’s classroom instruction time and restrict their interactions with other students.

The appeal aims to reverse a Louisiana administrative law judge’s decision and asks a federal court to end a practice that unlawfully excludes children with disabilities from full access to public education.

St. Tammany Parish School District placed a 9-year-old autistic student in a classroom alone and limited them to two hours of in-school instruction per day. Following this, school officials sent the child home for the remainder of the day without education services, supports or interaction with their peers in violation of their civil rights and the . The student’s parents said the measure was not temporary or therapeutic, but an unlawful exclusion that denied the student their right to a free and appropriate public education guaranteed under federal law.

The case began in March 2025, when the Loyola Law Clinic challenged the policy through the administrative judicial process. After the administrative judge ruled against the student’s family, Loyola Law Clinic and the Խ filed an appeal with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana and sued the school district for disability discrimination.

The post P.A., et al. v. St. Tammany Parish School Board, et al. appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>
Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville v. Knox County Board of Education /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/wilberforce-v-knox-county-board-education/ Mon, 02 Feb 2026 20:41:31 +0000 /?post_type=splc_case&p=171882

The (Խ) and co-counsel filed a motion to intervene in a federal lawsuit on behalf of five Knox County, Tennessee, taxpayers who oppose a religious public charter school’s demand to use public funds to teach “explicitly biblical and Christian education.”

In November 2025, the Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville filed a lawsuit seeking to compel the Knox County Board of Education to use taxpayer money to fund its religious public charter school. The proposed intervenors, who include public school parents, faith leaders and community leaders, are seeking to join the suit on the side of the defendants because they oppose the school’s proposed use of public money to fund religious education that would violate both Tennessee and federal law as well as the fundamental principle of separation of church and state.

Charter schools are a part of Knox County’s public education system and cannot advance religious doctrine. Like all public schools, they must accept and serve all students and cannot be run as religious schools. 

The intervenors are asking the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee to allow them to participate in the case to safeguard the right of all public-school students to a secular and equitable education.

The post Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville v. Knox County Board of Education appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>

The (Խ) and co-counsel filed a motion to intervene in a federal lawsuit on behalf of five Knox County, Tennessee, taxpayers who oppose a religious public charter school’s demand to use public funds to teach “explicitly biblical and Christian education.”

In November 2025, the Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville filed a lawsuit seeking to compel the Knox County Board of Education to use taxpayer money to fund its religious public charter school. The proposed intervenors, who include public school parents, faith leaders and community leaders, are seeking to join the suit on the side of the defendants because they oppose the school’s proposed use of public money to fund religious education that would violate both Tennessee and federal law as well as the fundamental principle of separation of church and state.

Charter schools are a part of Knox County’s public education system and cannot advance religious doctrine. Like all public schools, they must accept and serve all students and cannot be run as religious schools. 

The intervenors are asking the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee to allow them to participate in the case to safeguard the right of all public-school students to a secular and equitable education.

The post Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville v. Knox County Board of Education appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>
Mickens v. Oglethorpe County School System /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/mickens-v-oglethorpe-county-school-system/ Mon, 02 Feb 2026 20:18:36 +0000 /?post_type=splc_case&p=171859

The Southern Poverty Law Center (Խ) and the (GAE) filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Georgia teacher Michelle Mickens against her employer, the Oglethorpe County School System, after it unconstitutionally punished her for exercising her First Amendment rights by posting about political commentator Charlie Kirk on her personal Facebook page.

After Kirk’s assassination, Mickens posted a verbatim quote from the commentator on her personal Facebook page and participated in an online discussion with her Facebook friends who commented on the post. In the discussion, she was critical of Kirk’s opposition to gun control, but she also condemned political violence and articulated her hope for a safer world.  

Mickens has been a high school educator in Georgia for 24 years and was a statewide finalist for the 2022 Georgia Teacher of the Year. Yet, after online agitators shared her post with groups aiming to retaliate against teachers critical of Kirk, her school placed her on leave. The Oglethorpe County School System now intends to terminate her solely for engaging in constitutionally protected speech that caused no disruption to the school or her students.

The complaint, filed in the United States District Court Middle District of Georgia Athens Division, seeks to restore Mickens’ job and protect the rights of all educators against censorship and intimidation.

The post Mickens v. Oglethorpe County School System appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>

The Southern Poverty Law Center (Խ) and the (GAE) filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Georgia teacher Michelle Mickens against her employer, the Oglethorpe County School System, after it unconstitutionally punished her for exercising her First Amendment rights by posting about political commentator Charlie Kirk on her personal Facebook page.

After Kirk’s assassination, Mickens posted a verbatim quote from the commentator on her personal Facebook page and participated in an online discussion with her Facebook friends who commented on the post. In the discussion, she was critical of Kirk’s opposition to gun control, but she also condemned political violence and articulated her hope for a safer world.  

Mickens has been a high school educator in Georgia for 24 years and was a statewide finalist for the 2022 Georgia Teacher of the Year. Yet, after online agitators shared her post with groups aiming to retaliate against teachers critical of Kirk, her school placed her on leave. The Oglethorpe County School System now intends to terminate her solely for engaging in constitutionally protected speech that caused no disruption to the school or her students.

The complaint, filed in the United States District Court Middle District of Georgia Athens Division, seeks to restore Mickens’ job and protect the rights of all educators against censorship and intimidation.

The post Mickens v. Oglethorpe County School System appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>
United States v. Raffensperger /resources/civil-rights-case-docket/united-states-v-raffensperger/ Fri, 30 Jan 2026 17:33:38 +0000 /?post_type=splc_case&p=171776

The Southern Poverty Law Center, the and the of Georgia filed a motion to intervene in United States v. Raffensperger to stop the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) from obtaining Georgia voters’ sensitive personal data. The Խ and co-counsel filed the motion on behalf of Common Cause, a nonpartisan grassroots voter engagement organization, and its executive director, Rosario Palacios.

In August 2025, the DOJ requested Georgia turn over voters’ full names, dates of birth, addresses, driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers — extremely sensitive data that is protected under state and federal law. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger rightly declined to share voters’ personal data.

When voters provide personal information to states as part of the registration process, they trust that their privacy will be respected and their right to participate in elections will be honored. The DOJ has not made clear how this data will be used and protected. Their secrecy breaks voters’ trust and risks mass disenfranchisement, particularly among vulnerable populations such as naturalized citizens like Palacios.

Common Cause previously a lawsuit in Nebraska to protect state voter data and has joined with the ACLU Voting Rights Project to file motions to intervene as defendants in DOJ lawsuits against , , , , ,  and  for declining to turn over their voters’ private data.

The Georgia motion was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia Macon Division.

The post United States v. Raffensperger appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>

The Southern Poverty Law Center, the and the of Georgia filed a motion to intervene in United States v. Raffensperger to stop the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) from obtaining Georgia voters’ sensitive personal data. The Խ and co-counsel filed the motion on behalf of Common Cause, a nonpartisan grassroots voter engagement organization, and its executive director, Rosario Palacios.

In August 2025, the DOJ requested Georgia turn over voters’ full names, dates of birth, addresses, driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers — extremely sensitive data that is protected under state and federal law. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger rightly declined to share voters’ personal data.

When voters provide personal information to states as part of the registration process, they trust that their privacy will be respected and their right to participate in elections will be honored. The DOJ has not made clear how this data will be used and protected. Their secrecy breaks voters’ trust and risks mass disenfranchisement, particularly among vulnerable populations such as naturalized citizens like Palacios.

Common Cause previously a lawsuit in Nebraska to protect state voter data and has joined with the ACLU Voting Rights Project to file motions to intervene as defendants in DOJ lawsuits against , , , , ,  and  for declining to turn over their voters’ private data.

The Georgia motion was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia Macon Division.

The post United States v. Raffensperger appeared first on Southern Poverty Law Center.

]]>