Appeals court blocks Republicans' attempt to purge Michigan voter rolls

CINCINNATI (CN) — Republicans offer nothing more than speculative harms that might come to pass if Michigan fails to clean up its voter rolls and cannot establish standing for a federal lawsuit, the Sixth Circuit ruled Thursday.

In a succinct, six-page per curiam opinion, the court affirmed the ruling of U.S. District Judge Jane Beckering, who previously dismissed the case in October 2024.

The Republican National Committee (RNC), joined by several Michigan voters, sued the state, claiming it failed to make “reasonable efforts” to maintain accurate voter rolls under the National Voter Registration Act. The RNC argued that inaccurate data led to unnecessary and excessive spending on certain candidates, blocking the committee from developing effective strategies.

Beckering, an appointee of Joe Biden, determined the committee could not establish organizational standing through a “diversion of resources” theory of causation, and the appeals court agreed with her assessment.

“The RNC alleges that, in responding to the Michigan election officials’ actions, it ‘may spend more on resources,’ and ‘may misallocate its scarce resources’ if voter registration lists ‘include names of voters who should no longer be on the list.’ The RNC’s allegations of past economic injury — like expenditures of ’time and resources’ — are conclusory and the complaint fails to link them to ‘certainly impending’ or imminent future harm,” the panel said in its opinion.

The panel pointed to an earlier Sixth Circuit ruling that rejected a similar suit by a nonprofit seeking Michigan’s voter registration records under the same law against the same defendant, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson.

In that case, Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Benson , a separate panel found the nonprofit’s supposed economic injuries were too speculative to warrant relief.

Future campaign and staffing costs for the RNC stemming from Michigan’s inaccurate voter rolls are likewise too speculative to warrant relief, according to Thursday’s ruling.

“If the RNC’s injury turns solely on the possibility of incurring expenses, the claim that it ‘will continue’ to be injured means only that ‘it will continue’ to ‘maybe spend more’ or ‘maybe misallocate its scarce resources.’ The RNC’s allegations of such a ‘conjectural and hypothetical’ injury fall short of the pleadings required by Article III,” the panel said.

During arguments before the Sixth Circuit in June, the RNC was criticized for its lack of concrete data and was asked by the court to either amend its complaint or conduct discovery.

In Thursday’s ruling, the court rejected the argument and reminded the committee it was free to refile.

“The RNC will not suffer any prejudice from the district court’s decision. It dismissed the case under Civil Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Such dismissals, by definition, are without prejudice, permitting the RNC to refile its complaint,” the panel said.

The panel consisted of Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton and Senior U.S. Circuit Judges Helene White and Julia Smith Gibbons, all three of whom were appointed by George W. Bush.

The RNC also included allegations of voter fraud in its initial complaint to support a showing of organizational standing; however, the panel did not address the claim after determining that the committee “failed to advance it on appeal in any significant way.”

Neither party immediately responded to requests for comment.

Follow @kkoeninger44