A political activist has alleged in a thought-provoking video that Trump DOJ’s push to obtain sensitive state records from states could amount to a constitutional overreach aimed at federalizing U.S. elections.
In an Instagram post captioned “They’re doing it,” and posted by Karress Marie, the unidentified woman claimed in an accompanying video that requests directed at Minnesota for voter rolls, driver’s license data, and Social Security numbers—while allegedly linking those records to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—would violate multiple constitutional protections, including the First, Fourth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
“That’s coercive,” the woman said in the now-viral video, arguing that such data requests would infringe on civil liberties and undermine state authority over elections.
She asserted that the strategy could be designed to provoke legal challenges that test the limits of federal power over state-run voting systems.
According to the woman, the alleged approach follows a broader pattern: positioning the U.S. Department of Justice under Pam Bondi to claim that states are obstructing transparency and election integrity, thereby justifying federal intervention.
“They’re testing the will of the people, the governors, the courts, and how far federal pressure can go,” she said.
The woman further alleged that immigration enforcement is being used as leverage—suggesting that access to voter data could be exchanged for the withdrawal or deployment of ICE resources.
If true, legal experts say such a linkage would raise serious questions about states’ rights, data privacy, and the long-standing constitutional framework that leaves election administration primarily to the states.
No official documentation confirming the woman’s claims has been released, and neither Bondi nor federal officials have publicly responded to the allegations.
However, the remarks have amplified concerns among civil rights advocates who warn against conflating immigration enforcement with voting processes, a move they say could chill civic participation and invite constitutional litigation.
