U.S. Code » Title 52 » Subtitle Subtitle II— Voting Assistance and Election Administration › Chapter CHAPTER 205— NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION

52 U.S.C. § 20510

Civil enforcement and private right of action

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 52 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Attorney General

The Attorney General may bring a civil action in an appropriate district court for such declaratory or injunctive relief as is necessary to carry out this chapter.

(b) Private right of action(1) A person who is aggrieved by a violation of this chapter may provide written notice of the violation to the chief election official of the State involved.(2) If the violation is not corrected within 90 days after receipt of a notice under paragraph (1), or within 20 days after receipt of the notice if the violation occurred within 120 days before the date of an election for Federal office, the aggrieved person may bring a civil action in an appropriate district court for declaratory or injunctive relief with respect to the violation.(3) If the violation occurred within 30 days before the date of an election for Federal office, the aggrieved person need not provide notice to the chief election official of the State under paragraph (1) before bringing a civil action under paragraph (2).(c) Attorney’s fees

In a civil action under this section, the court may allow the prevailing party (other than the United States) reasonable attorney fees, including litigation expenses, and costs.

(d) Relation to other laws(1) The rights and remedies established by this section are in addition to all other rights and remedies provided by law, and neither the rights and remedies established by this section nor any other provision of this chapter shall supersede, restrict, or limit the application of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 1973 et seq.) [now 52 U.S.C. 10301 et seq.].(2) Nothing in this chapter authorizes or requires conduct that is prohibited by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 1973 et seq.) [now 52 U.S.C. 10301 et seq.].(Pub. L. 103–31, § 11, May 20, 1993, 107 Stat. 88.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The Voting Rights Act of 1965, referred to in subsec. (d), is Pub. L. 89–110, Aug. 6, 1965, 79 Stat. 437, which is classified generally to chapters 103 (§ 10301 et seq.), 105 (§ 10501 et seq.), and 107 (§ 10701 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 1973gg–9 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 61 cases (33 in the last 5 years), 2014–2026 · leading case: Proj. Vote, Inc. v. Kemp, 208 F. Supp. 3d 1320 (N.D. Ga. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Proj. Vote, Inc. v. Kemp, 208 F. Supp. 3d 1320 (N.D. Ga. 2016). · cites it 5× “” 52 U.S.C. § 20510 (a). Second, Section 11 creates a private right of action: (1) A person who is aggrieved by a violation of this chapter may provide written notice of the violation to the chief election official of the State involved.”
Nat'l Council of La Raza v. Barbara Cegavske, 800 F.3d 1032 (9th Cir. 2015). · cites it 3× “” 52 U.S.C. § 20510 (b); see also 138 Cong.”
Action NC v. Strach, 216 F. Supp. 3d 597 (M.D.N.C. 2016). · cites it 3× “52 U.S.C. § 20510 (b)(1). It is undisputed that on May 8, 2015, the Organizational Plaintiffs sent, a Notice Letter to Defendant Strach and Defendant Brajer’s predecessor at DHHS notifying them of alleged non-compliance with Section 7 of the NVRA.”
Bellitto v. Snipes, 221 F. Supp. 3d 1354 (S.D. Fla. 2016). · cites it 5× “52 U.S.C. § 20510 . This Court’s jurisdiction, therefore, stems directly from § 20510(b), and Plaintiffs’ standing to bring suit depends upon compliance with the statute.”
League of Women Voters of North Carolina v. North Carolina, 769 F.3d 224 (4th Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “” 52 U.S.C. § 20510 (d)(1). Fifth, also with respect to same-day registration, the district court suggested that because voting was not completely foreclosed and because voters could still register and vote by mail, a likely Section 2 violation had not been shown.”
United States v. Louisiana, 196 F. Supp. 3d 612 (M.D. La. 2016). · cites it 6× “2015), the NVRA affords two coequal enforcement methods, 52 U.S.C. § 20510 ; see also 138 Cong. Rec.”
Stringer v. Pablos, 320 F. Supp. 3d 862 (W.D. Tex. 2018). · cites it 10× “" And finally, Section 20510 provides civil enforcement by the Attorney General and a private right of action for any person "who is aggrieved by a violation of this chapter," 52 U.S.C. § 20510 (a) - (b), and the "rights and remedies .”
Fish v. Kobach, 840 F.3d 710 (10th Cir. 2016). “Bringing suit under the private right of action established by the NVRA, 52 U.S.C. § 20510 (b), and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , Plaintiffs-Appellees allege that Kansas’s DPOC requirement and the 90-day regulation are preempted by the NVRA and are unconstitutional under both the Elections…”
Am. Civil Rights Union v. Martinez-Rivera, 166 F. Supp. 3d 779 (W.D. Tex. 2015). · cites it 5× “As previously noted, the Tax Assessor-Collector has certain obligations under the NVRA as the designated voter registrar and state official.”
Bellitto v. Snipes, 268 F. Supp. 3d 1328 (S.D. Fla. 2017). · cites it 6× “In the *1334 Court’s view, a plain reading of 52 U.S.C. § 20510 reflects that the pre-suit notice Requirement thereunder is violation specific.”
Pub. Interest Legal Found. v. Boockvar, 370 F. Supp. 3d 449 (M.D. Penn. 2019). · cites it 2× “52 U.S.C. § 20510 (b)(1)-(2). Defendants contend that the Foundation does not qualify as a person aggrieved because its interests are "directly at odds" with the Act's stated goals.”
Christian Arnold v. Martin J. O'Malley, 106 F.4th 595 (7th Cir. 2024). “§ 1988 ; 52 U.S.C. § 20510 , which traditionally involve lodestar calculations.”
Show all 61 citing cases →
— 52 U.S.C. § 20510(a) — 1 case
Auth. to Obtain & Share Statewide Voter Roll Data (OLC 2026).
— 52 U.S.C. § 20510(b)(1) — 1 case
Green v. Bell (W.D.N.C. 2023).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.