Maryland’s Voter Roll Response to DOJ Raises Transparency Concerns by Election Watchdog Group

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) recently expressed concerns regarding the accuracy and maintenance of Maryland’s voter roll through an inquiry into the state’s compliance with federal law. A recent analysis by Secure the Vote Maryland suggests that the Maryland State Board of Elections (SBE) has not fully provided the necessary data to demonstrate the effectiveness of its voter roll maintenance processes, potentially impacting public trust in election integrity.

The DOJ initiated a review on July 14, 2025, requesting specific information from the Maryland State Board of Elections concerning its adherence to the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). The federal agency sought details such as the identification of responsible officials, documentation of list maintenance procedures, explanations for reported discrepancies, and evidence that these procedures are effective. In its response on July 30, 2025, the SBE outlined its practices but, according to Secure the Vote Maryland, offered limited verifiable data to substantiate their efficacy. According to Secure the Vote Maryland, out of fifteen specific requests made by the DOJ, only three were reportedly fully answered, four were partially addressed, and eight were left without comprehensive data.

Areas of concern highlighted by Secure the Vote Maryland include the lack of specific data on the removal of ineligible voters. While the SBE described its general procedures for maintaining voter rolls, it did not provide statistics on the actual number of removals. This absence of quantifiable results means the public cannot independently verify the effectiveness of these described processes. This is particularly noted in the context of independent data compiled by Secure the Vote Maryland, which indicated the continued presence of duplicate registrations, deceased individuals, and voters who have moved out of state on Maryland’s rolls. In some instances, active registrations were reported to exceed the eligible voting population, surpassing national averages for registration rates.

Furthermore, the DOJ’s inquiry identified eight specific concerns detailed in the Election Administration and Voting Survey (EAVS) report, on which the SBE was asked to provide individual responses. Instead of addressing each point directly, the SBE’s response largely discussed internal processes without resolving the core issues raised by the DOJ. Notably, the SBE did not identify responsible officials for list maintenance since 2022, nor did it provide reconciliations for significant statistical discrepancies in registration data. The SBE also did not fully explain why over 1.5 million confirmation notices were sent with a minimal number resulting in voter removals, nor did it provide data on the removal of non-citizens, felons, or adjudicated incompetents. Information regarding the number of merged duplicate registrations also remained absent.

Maryland’s reliance on the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) for identifying duplicate and outdated registrations has also been a point of scrutiny. ERIC’s effectiveness is questioned due to its limited participation among U.S. states, with fewer than half of states being members. The situation is further complicated by migration patterns, as four of the top five states from which Maryland voters move—Virginia, Florida, North Carolina, and Texas—are not ERIC members. This lack of participation from states where many Marylanders relocate means a significant portion of potential duplicate or outdated records may not be identified through the ERIC system. The absence of legislated verification processes or published performance metrics for ERIC further contributes to a lack of transparency regarding the accuracy and timeliness of the data it provides.

The integrity of elections is understood to depend not only on the accuracy of voter rolls but also on the public’s confidence in the competent and lawful management of these rolls. The DOJ’s request was viewed as an opportunity for Maryland to demonstrate openness and accountability. However, the perceived incomplete nature of the SBE’s response and the missing data have, according to Secure the Vote Maryland, contributed to increased skepticism. To restore public faith, Secure the Vote Maryland suggests that the SBE fully answer the DOJ’s questions, identify responsible officials, provide concrete data on voter removals and merges, reconcile statistical anomalies, disclose the outcomes of mass mailings like confirmation notices, and legislate clear, verifiable procedures for handling duplicate registrations. Maryland voters, it is argued, deserve verifiable facts rather than general assurances to ensure confidence in the democratic process.

Article by Ken Buckler, based upon information from Secure the Vote Maryland. Initial reviews of Secure the Vote Maryland’s findings appear to be accurate, but their full analysis should be reviewed further for more information. Any public statement issued by the Board of Elections regarding this matter will be covered in a follow-up article.

---