National Democrats accused the GOP-controlled State Board of Elections of “colluding with President Trump’s Justice Department to take away the voting rights of 98,000 North Carolinians.”

The claim involves several components: first, that National Democrats accused the GOP-controlled State Board of Elections of colluding with the Trump Justice Department; second, that this collusion concerns efforts to take away voting rights; and third, that about 98,000 North Carolinians are at risk. Evidence shows that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Litigation Director Dan Freeman publicly accused the Republican-controlled North Carolina State Board of Elections of working with the Trump Justice Department in a manner that threatens voter rights.newsobserver.comnewsobserver.comDNC accuses NC of colluding with Trump administration over missing voter data

The Justice Department filed a lawsuit against North Carolina and its State Board of Elections alleging failure to maintain accurate voter registration lists as required by federal law.democracydocket.comdemocracydocket.comAround 98,000 Voters Risk Disenfranchisement Under New North Carolina Plan This lawsuit targets incomplete voter registration information and seeks corrective action, which critics argue could disenfranchise voters if removals are not carefully managed. The figure of approximately 98,000 voters at risk comes from analyses and reports highlighting the number of registrations potentially affected by the DOJ's lawsuit and related state plans.

However, some sources mention higher numbers (e.g., 200,000) in broader contexts or related lawsuits,justice.govjustice.govOffice of Public Affairs | Justice Department Files Help America Vote Act... indicating some variation in estimates. The term "colluding" is a political characterization by Democrats reflecting their view that the GOP-controlled board and Trump DOJ are aligned in a way that harms voters; however, from a legal standpoint, the DOJ lawsuit is an enforcement action against the state board for alleged noncompliance with federal law.

The claim is mostly accurate in reporting the Democrats' accusation and the approximate number of voters potentially affected but reflects partisan framing. The context includes ongoing legal disputes over voter list maintenance and concerns about voter disenfranchisement amid election integrity debates. Thus, while the accusation is factually reported, the interpretation of "colluding" is subjective and politically charged.