Michigan AG Rejects DOJ's Request to Access Wayne County 2024 Ballots

Nessel says the request is 'absurd' and 'baseless', vowing to protect Michigan's elections.

Apr. 20, 2026 at 3:56am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A serene, cinematic painting of a lone ballot box sitting on a street corner, its surface reflecting the warm, golden light of the sun and casting deep, moody shadows across the pavement, evoking a sense of quiet contemplation about the democratic process.The dispute over federal access to Michigan's election records highlights the ongoing tensions between state and federal authorities in overseeing the integrity of the democratic process.Wayne Today

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has rejected a request from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to turn over 2024 election ballots and other voting materials from Wayne County. The DOJ said the request was intended to ensure federal election laws were not violated in the November 2024 election, citing convictions of election fraud in Wayne County. However, Nessel said the highlighted convictions show Michigan's safeguards are working and that voter fraud cases are 'rare and addressed' in the state.

Why it matters

This dispute highlights the ongoing tensions between state and federal authorities over election oversight and integrity. The DOJ's request raises concerns about potential federal overreach and interference in state-run elections, which Nessel has vowed to protect. The outcome could set a precedent for how election records are accessed and scrutinized in the future.

The details

In an April 14 letter, the DOJ demanded the Wayne County elections clerk produce all ballots, ballot receipts, and ballot envelopes from the 2024 elections within two weeks. Nessel rejected the request, saying it is 'as absurd as it is baseless.' She emphasized that in each case cited by the DOJ, the criminal conduct was flagged by local election officials, and only one involved a fraudulent vote. Nessel said the prosecutions represent an 'infinitesimal percentage' of the 878,102 people who voted in Wayne County in the 2020 election.

  • On April 14, the DOJ sent a letter demanding the Wayne County elections clerk produce 2024 election materials.
  • On April 19, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel rejected the DOJ's request.

The players

Dana Nessel

The Michigan Attorney General who rejected the DOJ's request to access Wayne County's 2024 election ballots and materials.

Department of Justice (DOJ)

The federal agency that requested access to Wayne County's 2024 election records, citing concerns about potential violations of federal election laws.

Gretchen Whitmer

The Governor of Michigan who joined Nessel and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson in a joint statement rejecting the DOJ's request.

Jocelyn Benson

The Michigan Secretary of State who joined Nessel and Governor Whitmer in a joint statement rejecting the DOJ's request.

Harmeet Dhillon

The DOJ assistant attorney general who sent the letter requesting access to Wayne County's election records.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“This request is as absurd as it is baseless. If this administration wants to bring this circus to our state, my office is prepared to protect the people's right to vote.”

— Dana Nessel, Michigan Attorney General

“The prosecutions are hardly representative of a 'history' of fraudulent voting in Wayne County.”

— Dana Nessel, Michigan Attorney General

What’s next

The dispute between Michigan and the DOJ over access to Wayne County's election records is likely to continue, with both sides vowing to protect their respective interests. The outcome could have implications for how federal authorities oversee state-run elections in the future.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tensions between state and federal authorities over election oversight and integrity. While the DOJ cites concerns about potential violations of federal election laws, Michigan officials argue that the state's safeguards are working and that voter fraud cases are rare. The dispute underscores the delicate balance between federal oversight and state autonomy in administering elections.