Judge Vacates DOJ Voter-Roll Policy; Trump Takes Clinton Suit to SCOTUS; Tariff Refund Class; AI Complaint Order: Oct 12

Better Call Claude Briefing — Oct 12, 2026

A federal judge in Washington struck down the Justice Department's nationwide push to collect and screen state voter rolls, President Trump asked the Supreme Court to revive his sanctioned lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, the trade court opened a class-action path to tariff refunds, and an Arizona judge told a self-represented plaintiff to rewrite her complaint without AI. The justices also return this week for two cases on sentencing rules and online video privacy. General news roundup only — not legal advice.

Judge vacates DOJ's nationwide voter-roll policy

On Friday, October 9, U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan in Washington, D.C., ruled for Common Cause and several individual voters and set aside what the record calls the Justice Department's "Voter List Maintenance Policy." Under that policy, DOJ's Civil Rights Division demanded unredacted statewide voter rolls, shared them with other agencies, ran them through the federal SAVE immigration database, and urged states to remove voters it flagged as ineligible. In a 78-page opinion, the judge held that none of the laws DOJ cited (the Civil Rights Act of 1960, the National Voter Registration Act, and the Help America Vote Act) authorizes that program, and that DOJ acted arbitrarily by ignoring evidence that SAVE's Social Security-derived citizenship data can be outdated, so naturalized citizens may be wrongly flagged. She also found violations of the Privacy Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act, writing that DOJ "cannot run roughshod over longstanding laws that were carefully crafted to protect the rights of the American people." The court vacated the policy outright rather than limiting relief to the named plaintiffs, though it stressed that states can still maintain their own rolls and the federal government can still lawfully help. Reuters reports 18 mostly Republican-led states had handed over data, and DOJ has lost 26 of its suits against states that refused. The department said it is reviewing the ruling, which comes weeks before the November 3 midterms and is an appealable final order.

Sources: CBS News, Reuters (syndicated), Memorandum opinion via Common Cause (PDF), Order via ACLU (PDF)

Trump asks the Supreme Court to revive his suit against Hillary Clinton

Also on Friday, President Trump and his former lead lawyer Alina Habba petitioned the Supreme Court to reinstate his 2022 lawsuit accusing Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, Christopher Steele, the Democratic National Committee, and others of conspiring to tie his 2016 campaign to Russia. U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks in Florida dismissed the case, calling it a "two-hundred-page political manifesto," and later ordered Trump and Habba to pay nearly $1 million in fees and costs, finding "knowingly false" allegations and "frivolous" legal theories. The 11th Circuit upheld both the dismissal and the sanctions in 2025. The new petition argues the filing deadline should have been extended because Trump held off suing during his first term to carry out his duties as president, and says the justices must step in "to protect the presidency" from courts that use sanctions to punish the president and his lawyers. The Court takes up only a small share of petitions, and the case would be a rare high-court look at sanctions against a sitting president's own lawyers.

Sources: Reuters via Honolulu Star-Advertiser

This week at SCOTUS: sentencing-guideline deference and a 1988 video-privacy law

The Supreme Court is closed for the Columbus Day / Indigenous Peoples' Day holiday today, but it hears two closely watched cases this week. On Tuesday, October 13, Beaird v. United States asks whether Stinson v. United States (1993) still requires judges to defer to the U.S. Sentencing Commission's official commentary on the federal sentencing guidelines, a question reopened after the Court narrowed deference to agency rule interpretations in Kisor v. Wilkie. The Solicitor General agreed the Fifth Circuit stretched deference too far and supported sending the case back, so the Court appointed an outside lawyer to defend the ruling below; because commentary shapes guideline ranges in a huge number of cases, the answer could quickly ripple through federal sentencing. On Wednesday, Salazar v. Paramount Global tests the Video Privacy Protection Act, passed after a reporter published Judge Robert Bork's video-rental list. Michael Salazar subscribed to a newsletter from Paramount-owned 247Sports.com and says the site's Meta Pixel sent his Facebook ID and video-viewing history to Facebook without consent. The Sixth Circuit held he was not a covered "consumer" because the newsletter was not audio-visual content; Salazar says the law covers any goods or services from a video provider, while Paramount warns his reading would turn a video-store statute into a sweeping internet-privacy regime with $2,500-per-person damages.

Sources: SCOTUSblog: Beaird preview, SCOTUSblog: Beaird docket, SCOTUSblog: Salazar preview, SCOTUSblog: Salazar docket

Trade court certifies a class for IEEPA tariff refunds

In an October 8 ruling in Freestyle World, Inc. v. United States, Judge Richard K. Eaton of the U.S. Court of International Trade certified a class of importers of record who paid duties under the challenged IEEPA tariff orders between February 1, 2025, and February 19, 2026, excluding companies that filed their own refund suits. The Supreme Court has already held that IEEPA does not let the president impose tariffs, so the fight now is over how importers get their money back, especially on entries that are "finally liquidated" and that Customs says it can reprocess only under a court order. Judge Eaton rejected the government's argument that differing refund amounts make the claims too individual for a class, noting Customs already has the entry data and processes refunds through its CAPE system, which opened a third phase on October 6 for plaintiffs in more than 4,000 individual cases. The ruling does not order refunds yet; the court still has to decide whether to direct Customs to reliquidate class members' entries without the IEEPA duties. It covers importers of record, not consumers who paid higher prices.

Sources: Freight Right

Arizona judge tells a self-represented plaintiff to redraft her complaint without AI

U.S. District Judge Krissa Lanham of the District of Arizona dismissed, with leave to amend, a 67-page employment-discrimination complaint that self-represented plaintiff Shelly George filed against the U.S. Department of Agriculture, after finding it showed hallmarks of AI generation: repetitive allegations, unclear and conflicting claims, and facts not tied to specific causes of action. The order, issued October 7 and reported by Reuters, lets George refile but requires her to personally draft the amended allegations and cap them at 25 pages. For later filings, the court requires disclosure of any generative-AI use, identification of the affected passages, and a certification that the filer independently reviewed and verified the material. George told Reuters AI was used only in part and that she plans to refile. The order matters because the problem was not fake citations, which have drawn sanctions nationwide, but a pleading too sprawling to show what was claimed; it signals courts may police whether AI-assisted filings are coherent, not just accurate. For anyone filing without a lawyer, the practical lesson is to read every sentence, verify every authority, and keep a short, plain statement that links each fact to each claim.

Sources: Washington Tribune, Large Language Law

---

This Briefing is general news for Better Call Claude readers. It is not legal advice, and nothing here creates an attorney-client relationship. Check primary sources and talk to a licensed lawyer about your situation.