Why the Trump administration keeps asking for Minnesota’s welfare data

The demand from the federal government to Minnesota leaders hasn’t relented for months: Hand over sensitive welfare data.

Starting this summer, the Department of Justice began pressing state officials to share Medicaid, nutrition assistance and voter information with the Trump administration. Attorney General Pam Bondi reupped her request the day federal agents killed Alex Pretti, penning a letter that Minnesota’s top elections official slammed as an “apparent ransom” to end the massive immigration operation rocking the state.

But why do Trump officials want this information? And are their demands to Minnesota — and a slew of other states — legal?

Here’s what you need to know.

Bondi’s Jan. 24 letter, addressed to Gov. Tim Walz, urges the state’s Democratic leadership to take three actions to “bring an end to the chaos in Minnesota” and “restore the rule of law”:

White House officials say they’re seeking welfare and voter data to prevent fraud in Minnesota. President Donald Trump has cited the sprawling social services scandal as a reason to deploy thousands of federal agents to the area.

But the benefits information, which includes up-to-date addresses and phone numbers, could help the government identify undocumented people receiving assistance and “become a catalyst for immigration enforcement,” said Elizabeth Laird, a director at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Democracy and Technology.

“What we’d like to do is talk to local officials and say, ‘You know what, according to the Medicaid rolls, where was the last address this person was domiciled?’” he said. “Or, according to a SNAP application, a food stamps application, maybe that could give us insight into where this person is today.”

Federal officials’ demands for unredacted voter files is part of the administration’s effort to create a nationwide voter database, said Jared Davidson, an attorney at Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan nonprofit.

Davidson noted the federal government has previously asked for voter information to identify non-citizen voters. But a recent Department of Homeland Security review has so far found no evidence of widespread voter fraud, as Trump has claimed. Some legal groups worry, too, that the voter database could be part of a plan to interfere with elections.

States already share some welfare data with the federal government, but the DOJ is now seeking highly sensitive information that states collect — from social security numbers to employment statuses.

The federal government generally has access to “high-level information” about the SNAP program, such as the number of people enrolled and audit details, according to attorney Nicole Schneidman of Protect Democracy.

Several experts described Bondi’s request for private information as unprecedented and potentially illegal.

Laird said the federal government for decades followed privacy norms codified after the Watergate scandal that shared a common philosophy: “Ask for as little personal data about people as possible.” Trump has eroded those norms, she said.

Lindsay Nash, a professor at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, said a legal principle called the anti-commandeering doctrine prohibits the federal government from forcing states to carry out federal programs. In Nash’s telling, the “massive threat” that underlies Bondi’s letter — compelling Minnesota to hand over sensitive data that could facilitate immigration enforcement in exchange for calm — violates the doctrine.

Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School professor and former deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, said there’s no legal basis for Bondi’s demand for voter data, noting federal laws preclude the DOJ from obtaining that information. He also pointed out that the recent letter “comes on the heels” of a massive ICE surge that led to the killings of two U.S. citizens.

“That makes Bondi’s demands outrageous purely because of the timing, if nothing else,” Levitt said.

U.S. District Judge Kate Menendez, who over the weekend denied the state’s case to temporarily halt the immigration operation, said during a Jan. 26 hearing that the letter seems to “strongly suggest” the federal government is trying to strong-arm the state to change its laws.

DOJ attorneys disagreed, denying any “hint of a quid pro quo.”

No. Simon and the DOJ have been sparring since the summer over the voter data request. The secretary of state rejected the initial demand, prompting the Justice Department to sue him for refusing to give the government the state’s voter registration list. That case is ongoing.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture in May asked for personal data from nutrition programs. A month later, the Trump administration instructed the state to submit health information and immigration status for individuals who received emergency medical treatment under Medicaid.

Minnesota is one of more than 20 states suing the Trump administration over its SNAP data demands. A California district court recently granted a preliminary injunction blocking the federal government from demanding states turn over sensitive nutrition program information.

This time, however, the federal government has broadened the information it’s pursuing. John Davisson, a director at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said that escalation could discourage people from going to the polls or enrolling in benefits for fear their information could end up in the government’s hands.

“This is going to chill even lawful, valid beneficiaries from seeking public benefits that they’re entitled to,” Davisson said.

Allison Kite and Nathaniel Minor of the Minnesota Star Tribune contributed to this story.