A federal judge has ruled that a Maryland State Board of Elections regulation violated federal election law, giving a win to “election integrity” activists suing the state for unrestricted access to voter rolls and voting histories.

Plaintiffs Katherine Strauch Sullivan and David Morsberger sued a handful of board members and the elections administrator because the state had rejected their request for voter lists.

Sullivan has led efforts in Maryland to suss out voter fraud and spearheaded another lawsuit in which she claimed the board had “lost control” of its voting system.

She runs a group called Secure the Vote Maryland that meets weekly to comb through voter files for deceased individuals, noncitizens and duplicate registrations. With the voter lists her team has obtained, they canvass neighborhoods to verify the names and addresses of registered voters.

She called Tuesday’s ruling “a major victory for election transparency in Maryland.”

“This is a significant step forward in our ongoing efforts to ensure the validity of our elections,” Sullivan’s statement said.

The state allows Maryland voters to access and pay for voter registration lists, but only for use in the electoral process, such as running for elective office. State agency regulations specifically say the electoral process does not include investigations into “an illegal or suspected illegal infraction or violation involving the voter’s behavior.

But U.S. District Judge Matthew J. Maddox ruled that federal law allows voter records to be checked for their accuracy, too, and found it “impracticable to disaggregate” a search for accuracy versus inaccuracy based on federal voting laws.

State election administrator Jared DeMarinis said the board restricted access to protect voters from undue harassment and intimidation.

“We understand the court’s position and the state board will review the regs,” DeMarinis said, “but know that we’re always making sure that voters can vote securely and confidently and without any fear of intimidation.”

The state’s “legitimate interests” in restricting use of the records, such as preventing voter harassment, “may [be] satisfied by state laws against harassment and trespass,” Maddox wrote.

Co-plaintiff Morsberger said the ruling allows his group to return to work, “using all data available to identify anomalies” and share them with local and state elections boards.

“We look forward to once again working with all citizens in a cooperative and non-intimidating manner to clean up voter rolls and improve voter confidence in future elections,” he said.

Based on Sullivan’s examination of state voter rolls, she filed a lawsuit as part of a coordinated national effort to halt the 2024 elections until voter rolls were purged of all errors. That case fell flat after a federal appeals court judge said they lacked judicial standing and had failed to prove any harm.

Good-government groups watching cases like that one play out across the country have said the “baseless claims” about widespread voting irregularities are being used to question elections and undermine democracy.

Correction: This article was updated to reference state agency regulations.