The Department of Justice has found at least 350,000 dead people still listed on voter rolls across multiple jurisdictions, and has referred roughly 25,000 individuals with no citizenship records to the Department of Homeland Security for further investigation, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said Sunday.

Dhillon laid out the scope of the problem during an appearance on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" with Maria Bartiromo, describing the state of America's voter registration system as a "mess" and detailing a sprawling legal campaign to force states into compliance with federal election law.

The numbers alone tell the story. The DOJ has run 60 million voter records so far. What it found should alarm anyone who takes election integrity seriously, and should embarrass every state official who let these rolls rot.

The DOJ's findings: dead voters, non-citizens, and stonewalling states

Dhillon told Bartiromo that the federal review exposed a registration system riddled with inaccuracies and potential fraud, as the Daily Caller reported.

"States are not in compliance, even those ones who want to. So, for the ones that we've run so far, 60 million records that we've run, we found at least 350,000 dead people currently on the voter rolls in those jurisdictions, and we've referred approximately 25,000 people with no citizenship records to [the Department of] Homeland Security to look at, you know, dig into that further and see the extent to which people voted."

That last line is worth reading twice. The DOJ isn't just finding names that shouldn't be there. It is trying to determine whether those names were used to cast ballots.

For years, the political left dismissed concerns about non-citizen voting as a fringe conspiracy theory. Dhillon addressed that claim head-on.

"I'm in touch with voting rights activists who are showing me information about people who have voted who are not American citizens. So the Left told us this never happens and it's a myth, it definitely happened."

That assertion is no longer abstract. The DOJ pointed to a recent indictment in Minnesota, a state not typically associated with voter fraud headlines, as concrete proof. A federal investigation into election records and voting irregularities has clearly moved beyond Arizona and into states that Democrats long considered above reproach.

Minnesota's 'weird vouching law' draws DOJ scrutiny

Dhillon singled out Minnesota for particular attention. She said someone was recently indicted there for voting without being a citizen, and she has sent a document request to the state in response.

But the indictment itself wasn't the only issue. Dhillon took aim at the state's registration process.

"Minnesota has a weird vouching law that allows citizens to vouch for each other's citizenship. That's crazy and inconsistent with the Help America Vote Act and we're not going to rest until we complete this project."

A system where one citizen can vouch for another's eligibility, with no documentary proof required, is the kind of arrangement that practically invites abuse. That it persists in a state where a non-citizen has now been indicted for voting only sharpens the point. Readers following legal controversies in Minnesota courts will recognize a pattern of lax accountability.

29 states and D.C. refuse to hand over voter rolls

Perhaps the most telling detail in Dhillon's interview was not what the DOJ found, but how many states are fighting to keep the federal government from looking at all.

Dhillon stated plainly that she is suing 29 states and the District of Columbia for refusing to turn over voter registration data that the attorney general is entitled to under the Civil Rights Act of 1960.

"I'm suing 29 states and the District of Columbia for their refusal to give us the voter rolls to which the attorney general or the acting attorney general is entitled under the Civil Rights Act of 1960."

Think about that number. More than half the states in the country are actively stonewalling a lawful federal request for voter registration records. The DOJ says it has clear statutory authority. The states say otherwise, or simply refuse to cooperate.

In several of those cases, federal judges have ruled against the Trump administration. A federal judge rejected the DOJ's lawsuit seeking Michigan voter registration data, illustrating the legal headwinds Dhillon's team faces. Other judges in politically sensitive cases have similarly blocked federal enforcement actions, a trend that has frustrated the administration's broader legal agenda.

Dhillon pushes expedited appeals

Dhillon made clear the DOJ is not backing down. She said the department is expediting appeals in the voter-roll cases and expects action soon in two of the nation's most consequential appellate courts.

"We're expediting the appeals in these cases. There'll be an appeal in the Ninth Circuit [Court of Appeals] and the Sixth Circuit soon."

The Ninth Circuit covers much of the West Coast, including California. The Sixth Circuit covers Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Favorable rulings in either court would force large blocs of states to hand over their rolls, or face consequences for continued defiance.

The legal fight is unfolding against the backdrop of President Trump's March 2025 executive order, which required the federal Election Assistance Commission to update its voter registration form to require proof of citizenship. That order signaled the administration's intent to tackle registration integrity at every level, from the initial sign-up form to the maintenance of existing rolls.

The real question: who benefits from dirty rolls?

The DOJ's effort rests on the National Voter Registration Act, the Help America Vote Act, and the Civil Rights Act of 1960, laws designed to protect the right to vote. Dhillon framed the cleanup not as voter suppression but as a basic obligation states have been neglecting.

The numbers back her up. If 60 million records yielded 350,000 dead registrants and 25,000 people with no citizenship documentation, the full national picture, once all 50 states are reviewed, could be far larger. The DOJ has not yet run every jurisdiction. Many of the biggest states are the ones refusing to cooperate.

States that resist transparency on their voter rolls invite an obvious question: what are they afraid the federal government will find? Lawful voters have nothing to lose from accurate registration lists. Dead voters and non-citizens on the rolls don't protect anyone's rights, they dilute the votes of every citizen who follows the rules.

The broader pattern of courts intervening in politically charged enforcement disputes, from high-profile criminal cases to election-law battles, shows how much of the administration's agenda now runs through the judiciary. Dhillon's expedited appeals strategy is a direct response to that reality.

Several important questions remain unanswered. Which specific states make up the 29 being sued? Which jurisdictions were included in the 60 million records already reviewed? How many of the 25,000 individuals referred to DHS actually cast ballots? And what will the Ninth and Sixth Circuits decide?

Those answers will shape the integrity of every election going forward. For now, the DOJ has laid out a factual case that voter rolls across the country are bloated with names that don't belong there, and that a majority of states would rather fight in court than clean house.

When officials fight harder to keep dead voters on the rolls than to keep living citizens' votes secure, the priorities of the system are plain enough for anyone to see.