Project CIVICA flags 10,700 New York voter records in Second Circuit filing

Project CIVICA told the Second Circuit that voter files from at least 14 New York counties include about 10,700 records flagged as non-citizens, with some showing voting history as recently as 2024 and 2025. The group says the discrepancy shows why federal officials need access to statewide voter-registration records and the administrative files behind them.

Why it matters: - Project CIVICA says New York voter-file data may show registration problems that are invisible in public snapshots but relevant to election-law enforcement. - The group argues that federal review of statewide records is necessary to assess whether voter-registration lists are accurate, current, transparent and lawfully maintained. - The filing could affect how much access the U.S. Department of Justice gets to New York’s voter-registration system in a case over federal inspection rights.

What happened: - Project CIVICA filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in United States v. Board of Elections of the State of New York, No. 26-2060. - The brief says voter files from at least 14 New York counties contain about 10,700 records flagged as non-citizens. - Some of those records appear to show voting activity in prior elections, including as recently as 2024 and 2025. - The appeal stems from the U.S. Department of Justice’s request for access to New York’s statewide voter-registration system and related records.

The details: - Project CIVICA says New York’s statewide voter-registration database, NYSVoter, does not identify the same people as noncitizens. - Many matching statewide entries appear to be marked as purged for “duplicate” status. - The brief says public records do not explain the actual basis for removal or whether non-citizenship was considered. - Project CIVICA says its review drew on official voter-file snapshots, county voter rolls obtained through New York’s Freedom of Information Law, statewide data, interstate comparisons, National Change of Address data and related election-administration records. - The organization reports apparent duplicate registrations, records tied to deceased individuals, voters appearing in multiple states, inconsistencies between county and statewide records, unexplained status changes and voter history that later disappeared from statewide datasets. - The district court ruled that New York’s statewide voter-registration list was not a “record or paper” subject to federal inspection under Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960. - The district court also concluded federal law did not require disclosure of the list under the National Voter Registration Act. - Project CIVICA contends that public voter files can show that a record changed, but not why it changed, who authorized the change or whether the action complied with federal election law. - The brief includes the statement: “These are not abstract concerns about data architecture.” - The brief also says: “The public records identify the issue; the administrative records explain it.”

Between the lines: - Project CIVICA is making a broader argument about election oversight, not just the specific New York records it reviewed. - The group says the court’s ruling creates an enforcement gap because federal law requires statewide computerized voter-registration systems, but the government may be blocked from examining the underlying records needed to evaluate compliance. - The filing is careful to frame the findings as anomalies that need further examination, not proof of improper voting by any individual.

What's next: - Project CIVICA is asking the Second Circuit to reverse the Northern District of New York’s dismissal of the DOJ’s case. - The group wants the court to reaffirm that federal election law allows meaningful access to voter-registration records and the documentation supporting them. - The appeal remains pending in United States v. Board of Elections of the State of New York, No. 26-2060.

The bottom line: - The brief turns a data-discrepancy dispute into a test of how much visibility federal officials can have into state voter-registration systems.