So far, Donald Trump has spent his week making deranged threats to world peace. Meanwhile, I’ve been focusing on defending voters in Idaho. That’s because last Wednesday, the Department of Justice added Idaho to the list of states it is suing to gain access to unredacted, individualized voter data.

Over the last few months, a familiar pattern has emerged. Trump's DOJ sues a state to obtain the voting information that states keep on their citizens, and within days, my law firm intervenes on behalf of groups of voters seeking to protect the privacy of that data.

So far, the DOJ has sued 29 states plus the District of Columbia — 30 cases in all. My team has sought to defend voters in each of them. Twenty-one courts have granted our motions to intervene, and only one has been denied. The remaining eight, including Idaho, are pending.

It is grueling work. Unlike other areas of law, fighting for voting rights means battling state by state, in courtrooms across the country.

Each of these cases involves not only briefings but hearings as well. In the last month alone, we have had hearings in seven different states. We have won three of those — including a key victory before a Trump-appointed judge in Michigan — and are awaiting rulings in the other four.

There is much more ahead. We have four more hearings already scheduled in four different states, and 11 additional cases are fully briefed and awaiting hearing dates.

These 30 cases are not the most glamorous in my firm's portfolio. Among the nearly 90 cases we are litigating, several are pending before the Supreme Court, dozens before federal and state courts of appeals are raising novel constitutional claims, and a recent lawsuit is challenging Trump's anti-voting executive order.

While these cases are important, none of them pose as great a threat to free and fair elections as the 30 voter roll cases. It is no exaggeration to say that their outcome may determine whether Trump can steal the 2026 midterm elections.

The reason is straightforward. In politics, voter data is the most valuable commodity. Campaigns that want to turn out voters start with a voter file. Right-wing groups looking to challenge voters rely on a voter file. It is the most basic building block of any campaign.

States maintain detailed voting records because the voter file is also the foundation upon which elections are administered. It is used to determine who is registered, who is eligible to vote, and who has voted.

Voter files are used to print poll books for Election Day and to send out absentee ballots. While some of this data is public, the most sensitive information — such as Social Security numbers — is kept confidential by the states.

Critically, the federal government does not maintain a national voter database, nor has it ever had access to the information the states keep. That is because, under our Constitution, elections are administered by the states — not the federal government. This is not an oversight or technicality. It is a structural safeguard that, until recently, had strong bipartisan support.

That is, until Trump decided to attack that safeguard for partisan advantage.

Over the last few months, the administration has offered a series of justifications for demanding this data. One by one, those justifications have been debunked, and the true purpose has emerged.

The administration wants to create a national list of voters that it controls — one that states would then be required to accept. If it can obtain all the states' voter files, it will process them, scrub them and send back lists of the individuals the Trump administration deems eligible to vote.

Any state that disagrees or fails to comply would face sanctions. The U.S. Postal Service would be barred from delivering ballots to anyone not on the Trump-approved list. State and local election officials who refused to follow Trump's list would face criminal prosecution.

What I just described is not hypothetical. It is essentially what Trump put in his executive order on voting — an order he issued precisely because the DOJ has been unable to obtain the full voter files from these 30 states. He could not get the data through litigation, so he is now trying to seize it by executive decree.

That is where we are. And that is why these 30 cases matter as much as anything my firm is litigating.

If Trump succeeds, he will quickly construct a federal voter list that determines who can vote and whose vote is counted. He will assert the power to rig elections by disqualifying voters before they vote or after their ballots have been received.

He has repeatedly asserted that states are his agents in conducting elections. He has said he wants Republicans to take over voting. This scheme to create a national voter database and supplant the states’ role is what he has in mind.

We cannot let him have this power. The stakes could not be higher. Neither can our resolve. 

That is why, as Trump made unhinged threats to the world order, I was focused on Idaho. Regardless of what is happening in the news, you can always bet I will be focused on the 30 cases that will determine the future of free and fair elections. I don’t have a choice — democracy depends on it.