Judicial Watch, AEF Ask Supreme Court for Access to Voter Records

We filed an amici curiae (friends of the court) brief along with the Allied Educational Foundation (AEF) to the Supreme Court of the United States, asking it to reverse the Third Circuit’s decision denying the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) standing to sue for voter information guaranteed under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).

The Public Interest Legal Foundation, a nonprofit, public interest law firm dedicated to election integrity, is suing for access to Pennsylvania’s voter rolls following a failure to disclose an estimated 100,000 noncitizen registered voter records. Pennsylvania officials reportedly admitted that “for decades, the Department of Motor Vehicles had allowed non-U.S. citizens to register to vote through the state’s ‘motor voter’ system.”

Our amici brief comes in the case Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Al Schmidt, Secretary of Pennsylvania, et al. (No. 1590, 1591, 3045, 379)), which is on appeal from the Third Circuit, where the court denied access to public records requested under the NVRA’s public disclosure provision. The issue in the case is whether the Virginia-based nonprofit has standing to sue under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).

In our amici brief, we and AEF argue:

The denial of access to public records requested under the NVRA’s public-disclosure provision, 52 U.S.C. § 20507(i), inflicts a concrete informational injury deeply rooted in centuries of common-law tradition. 

The Third Circuit’s decision … departs from this precedent by imposing a novel “nexus” requirement, demanding plaintiffs prove downstream harms beyond the denial itself. This ruling exacerbates a sharp and growing circuit split. Circuits like the Fourth adhere to this Court’s framework, finding standing upon denial alone.

The Third Circuit’s decision contains serious legal errors and directly conflicts with longstanding Supreme Court precedent. This Court has held that a person who is denied requested public records suffers a concrete injury … [The Third Circuit adopted] a new requirement [that] conflicts with previous rulings by this Court on this issue.

This case shows the urgent need for citizenship verification for voting. The Department of Justice should follow up with a national investigation.

The Allied Educational Foundation is a charitable and educational foundation dedicated to improving the quality of life through education. In furtherance of that goal, the Foundation has engaged in a number of projects, which include educational and health conferences domestically and abroad. AEF has partnered frequently with us to fight government and judicial corruption and to promote a return to ethics and morality in the nation’s public life.

We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of our work, we have assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.

Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads our election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.

We have several federal lawsuits to clean up potentially millions of names from the voter rolls.

On October 8, 2025, oral arguments were held in the U.S. Supreme Court in a historic case we filed on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two presidential electors, who are before the court to vindicate their standing to challenge an Illinois law allowing the counting of ballots received up to 14 days after Election Day (Rep. Michael J. Bost, Laura Pollastrini, and Susan Sweeney v. The Illinois State Board of Elections and Bernadette Matthews (No. 1:22-cv-02754, 23-2644, 24-568)).

We recently filed a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi, opposing the State of Mississippi’s attempt to overturn the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s decision, which struck down a law allowing ballots received after Election Day to be counted.

Federal courts in Oregon, California and Illinois recently ruled that Judicial Watch’s lawsuits against those states may proceed, forcing them to clean their voter rolls.

We announced in May that its work led to the removal of more than five million ineligible names from voter rolls nationwide.

Judicial Watch Sues Pritzker for Records on Texas Democrat Lawmakers

Gov. JB Pritzker (D-IL) decided to harbor Texas Democrats, who fled the state in an effort to derail a congressional redistricting bill, and we’d like to know more about his actions.

We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against Pritzker for records on the state’s role in providing refuge to Texas Democrat legislators, who fled their state in an attempt to deny quorum and block the redistricting vote (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Office of the Governor (No. 2025CH000057)).

Texas’ House Rules Manual states that “all absentees for whom no sufficient excuse is made may, by order of a majority of those present, be sent for and arrested, wherever they may be found, by the sergeant-at-arms or an officer appointed by the sergeant-at-arms for that purpose, and their attendance shall be secured and retained.” The state Supreme Court in 2021 upheld that rule, giving the House the power to arrest absent members to establish a quorum.

We sued in the Circuit Court of Sangamon County, Illinois, County Department, Chancery Division after Pritzker’s office failed to respond to an August 2025 FOIA request for:

All audio/visual recordings, handwritten notes, agendas, minutes, and reports related to a meeting or meetings held between Governor Pritzker and congressional Democrats at which Texas congressional redistricting and/or Illinois possibly housing Texas Democratic state lawmakers was discussed.

All audio/visual recordings, handwritten notes, agendas, minutes, and reports related to a meeting held between Governor Pritzker and Democratic party officials in late June 2025 in Oklahoma regarding congressional redistricting matters, as discussed at https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/inside-texas-democrats-plan-to-seek-refuge-with-illinois-gov-j-b-pritzker/ar-AA1JVS1T?ocid=socialshare.

All emails sent between and among officials in Governor Pritzker’s immediate office, including but not limited to Governor Pritzker and his chief of staff, regarding Texas congressional redistricting.

On August 3, 2025, more than 50 Texas Democrats fled the state in an attempt to derail a congressional redistricting bill. Pritzker then announced: “[Texas Democrats] are here in Illinois. We’re going to do everything we can to protect every single one of them and make sure that — ’cause we know they’re doing the right thing, we know that they’re following the law.”

Pritzker’s involvement reportedly began “at a dinner in late June hosted by Oklahoma Democrats, where he discussed the possibility of helping Texas Democrats fight back against the redistricting plan with state party chair Kendall Scudder ..”

Pritzker, a billionaire heir to the Hyatt Hotel fortune, appeared on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert on August 6, 2025, and when asked why the Texas legislators went to Illinois, the governor responded, “The great heroes of the House Democratic caucus decided the only thing they could do in order to stop it was leave Texas. And where did they decide to come to? The safe haven of the state of Illinois where we are going to protect them and take care of them.”

Later in the interview, Colbert asked whether the FBI could arrest the Texas legislators located in Illinois. Pritzker stated, “Frankly in the state of Illinois, we are not going to let them get taken away. We are going to protect the Texas House Democrats.... As long as they are in Illinois, they are safe.”

The Texas Democrats ended their walkout on August 18, 2025. The Texas state Senate on August 22, 2025, passed the new redistricting map and Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed it into law on August 29, 2025.

Pritzker seemed delighted to host the truant Texas Democrat “heroes,” aiding and abetting an illegal two-week tantrum.

Judicial Watch Sues AZ Gov. Hobbs over Immigration Enforcement Non-Compliance

We filed an Arizona Public Records Law lawsuit against Gov. Katie Hobbs for records regarding her office reportedly ordering state police and the Arizona National Guard to withhold cooperation from federal immigration enforcement authorities (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Office of the Arizona Governor (No. CV2025-039217)).

Governor Hobbs’ apparent refusal to allow state resources to support lawful immigration operations undermines the rule of law and places law enforcement and other innocent lives at risk.

We sued in Maricopa County Superior Court following the governor’s office’s “no responsive records” response to a December 17, 2024, records request. The request specifically sought:

• Any communications, memos, or orders issued to state agencies reflecting a policy of non-participation in federal immigration enforcement;
• Documentation of any legal analyses or contemplated litigation related to the governor’s stance on state-level involvement in immigration law enforcement.

Arizona law states: “No official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may limit or restrict the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.”

In November 2024, Hobbs responded to a question on whether Arizona’s state police and National Guard would assist with federal immigration enforcement efforts by stating, “What I will unequivocally say is that, as governor, I will not tolerate efforts that are part of misguided policies that harm our communities, that threaten our communities, that terrorize our communities, and Arizona will not take part in those…. We will not be participating in misguided efforts that harm our communities, and I've been incredibly clear about that.”

Federal supremacy in immigration matters is established by the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause and codified in the Immigration and Nationality Act in Title 8 of the U.S. Code. These provisions reserve exclusive authority to the federal government for the regulation of admission, removal, and enforcement of immigration laws.

Judicial Watch Sues Evanston Mayor for Breaking with Immigration Law

Federal law clearly gives the federal government responsibility for immigration matters, but the mayor of Evanston, IL, population of 76,000, decided to take matters into his own hands.

We filed an Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against Evanston, IL, Mayor Daniel Biss for records related to obstruction of federal immigration enforcement (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Office of the Mayor (No. 2025CH11002)).

We sued in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, Chancery Division, after the mayor’s office failed to comply with a September 25, 2025, FOIA request for:

On September 8, 2025, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced “Operation Midway Blitz,” targeting “the criminal illegal aliens who flocked to Chicago and Illinois because they knew Governor Pritzker and his sanctuary policies would protect them and allow them to roam free on American streets.”

On September 11, 2025, Biss said that upon learning of planned federal immigration enforcement activity in Evanston, he notified residents so they could “protect themselves.” He further stated, “We’ve been doing everything we can to protect our residents from before Donald Trump took office, passing strong sanctuary laws to make sure police are not cooperating with federal civil immigration enforcement.” Biss reportedly ordered Evanston’s license plate cameras turned off after learning the data was being shared with federal immigration authorities.

On September 19, Biss reportedly was involved in a protest during which federal law enforcement agents deployed pepper and tear gas at an ICE processing center in Broadview, IL. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security stated “desperate politicians want their 15 minutes of fame, and they’re willing to do it off the backs of our law enforcement…. We will not back down.”

On September 26, tear gas again was used to disperse violent protesters at the Broadview facility. An ICE spokesperson said two people were arrested, “one of whom was carrying a firearm.” Also, “rioters and sanctuary politicians obstructed law enforcement, threw tear gas cans, rocks, bottles, and fireworks, slashed tires of cars, blocked the entrance of the building, and trespassed on private property.”

In October 2025, Evanston, IL, issued a press release discussing “ICE-Free Zones” and strategies for “state and local agencies—including the Secretary of State, the Illinois Accountability Commission, and the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office” to hinder federal immigration enforcement actions.

The mayor of Evanston’s apparent interference with lawful immigration operations shows disrespect for the rule of law and the safety of innocent lives.

Maine Lawmaker Defames Parents Protesting Trans Boys in Girls’ Sports 

Leslie Trentalange, an elected official in Kennebunk, Maine, publicly attacked parents with traditional values. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.

In a public declaration that is shocking even for an attention-seeking liberal politician, an elected official in Maine defamed parents who oppose transgender males in girls’ sports and restrooms as having “pedophilic tendencies.” Though the egregious attack in Kennebunk may seem worse to some, it brings to mind when Hillary Clinton called Donald Trump supporters “deplorables” at a New York Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) fundraiser during her second failed presidential campaign in 2016. Clinton further described Trump supporters to her loyal fans as racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic and Islamophobic. Years later, Clinton doubled down on her reprehensible comments, writing in a major newspaper during a campaign to promote her latest book that deplorables is “too kind” for some Trump backers.

The Maine public official who blasted concerned parents is also sticking to her highly offensive words, refusing to apologize for calling them pedophiles because they want to protect their children. The incident occurred a few weeks ago during a school board meeting when Kennebunk Select Board member Leslie Trentalange suggested the protesting parents have “pedophilic tendencies.” A video of the appalling comments is available on the website of the local newspaper, which also quotes the elected official in a story of the October 20 school board meeting. Referring to parents who object to boys in girls’ sports and bathrooms, Trentalange said: “Their obsession with what private parts are sitting in between the legs of our students is nothing less than creepy and should absolutely be raising eyebrows in and around our school district.” She continued even as those in attendance, including members of the school board, seemed taken aback: “Their obsession with genitalia points not to caring for the students in this district, but perhaps to an underlying guilt for their own pedophilic tendencies. There is a registry for that,” the Kennebunk legislator added.

School Board Chair Matthew Stratford attempted to interrupt Trentalange’s tirade, according to the local news report and video of the meeting and called her comments “inappropriate.” She kept talking however and finished her insulting rant. The unhinged lawmaker insisted she did not think her comments were inappropriate and that she stood by them. Trentalange is the vice chair of Kennebunk’s Select Board and a school board liaison, though she reportedly stepped down from that position after her offensive testimony at the recent meeting, but remains on the Select Board. The Select Board is the town’s governing body and consists of seven elected members who serve three-year staggering terms. Among their duties and responsibilities are establishing policy, supervising Kennebunk’s manager, representing the town on various regional and state issues, and providing public leadership. The governing body’s code of conduct includes a provision that states “discussions should be conducted in a professional manner with all participants treating each other with civility and respect.” The code was designed to define the behavior, manners and courtesy expected of Select Board members as they interact with each other, Town staff, and their constituents and requires them to “demonstrate honesty and integrity in every action and statement.”

Accusing parents of being pedophiles for trying to shield their girls from the detriments of the transgender revolution does not seem to demonstrate integrity required under the town’s code for elected officials. At a follow-up board meeting Trentalange issued what the local newspaper called a “non-apology for calling protesting parents pedophiles.” She acknowledged that she made a statement that may have pushed some boundaries at the school board meeting, but “avoided in any way recanting her inflammatory statements or acknowledging that they were inappropriate,” according to the news article. The elected official did however apologize to the “queer community” for the harm caused by her comments. “If there are folks in the marginalized queer community that feel my message did not serve them or hurt them in any way, it is that which I regret,” Trentalange said. No mention of the girls harmed by outrageous policies that allow boys, who are physically much stronger and bigger, to compete on their sports teams.

Until next week,