Supreme Court Allows Trump Administration to Use Expanded Voter Citizenship Database
publishers 24articles 26first reported 24 Sep, 11:41 UTCdeveloping since 24 Sep · 4 editions
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Trump administration to use an expanded federal citizenship database while a legal challenge continues, temporarily pausing a lower-court order that had blocked the expanded system.
The 6-3 emergency decision permits the Department of Homeland Security to operate the modified Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, program. The administration expanded SAVE in 2025 to include records of U.S.-born citizens, access Social Security data and support bulk searches by state and local officials checking voter eligibility.
U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan blocked the expanded system in June, finding that the administration had violated federal privacy laws and had “knowingly trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens.” A federal appeals court later declined to pause her ruling before the Supreme Court acted.
In an unsigned opinion, the Supreme Court said the government has an obligation to answer state and local requests to verify voters’ citizenship and that the lower-court order impeded federal assistance with election administration. The case will continue in the lower courts.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. Jackson wrote that the majority had discounted risks to lawful voters, arguing that even limited disenfranchisement outweighed the government’s asserted harm.
Federal law prohibits systematic voter-roll removals within 90 days of a federal election, although individualized eligibility inquiries remain permitted. Voting-rights groups challenging SAVE say its records are inaccurate and could cause eligible voters to be improperly flagged or removed.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 8 articles, 5 with the publisher's own text; 8 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written within the hour the record first saw the story; the editor revised it.
- Publishers
- 24
- Source articles
- 26
- Given to the writer
- 8, 5 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 8
- This version written
- within the hour the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- revised
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →