Supreme Court Allows Use of Expanded Database for Voter Verification

The U.S. Supreme Court on September 25, 2026, permitted the Trump administration to utilize an expanded federal database that contains citizenship information, as the administration encourages states to review their voter rolls. The decision was made with a 6-3 vote along ideological lines, with the conservative justices in the majority. This ruling follows lower court decisions that indicated the changes to the database might be unlawful. Critics have raised concerns about the reliability of the data and the potential for U.S. citizens to be removed from voter rolls. However, the court's unsigned ruling stated that the National Voter Registration Act limits broad purging of voter rolls close to elections, which mitigates the decision's immediate impact. States are still permitted to conduct individual inquiries about voters. The court also noted that federal law mandates the government to respond to state requests for citizenship information. The Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program (SAVE), established in 1986, was expanded by the Trump administration following an executive order in March 2025 aimed at ensuring that only U.S. citizens participate in elections. The database was enhanced by incorporating information from the Social Security Administration, allowing searches by Social Security numbers and enabling bulk searches. In dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argued that the government had not sufficiently demonstrated the need to block the lower court's ruling, stating that the potential disenfranchisement of lawful voters outweighed any harm to the government from the injunction. Reports indicated that after states began using the expanded system, local officials found errors, particularly involving newly naturalized citizens. Texas was among the first states to process its voter rolls through the SAVE database, which includes over 18 million registrations, yet only three individuals have been charged with illegal voting as noncitizens. The League of Women Voters led a legal challenge against the plan, citing violations of the Social Security Act and the Privacy Act. A federal judge and the U.S. Court for the District of Columbia Circuit both ruled against the plan. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that the district court's ruling jeopardizes the integrity of upcoming elections by hindering the government's ability to verify voter citizenship. Opponents of the expanded database contend that it could impose additional bureaucratic requirements on newly naturalized citizens flagged by the system. Noncitizen voting is rare, and states are required to maintain their voter rolls under federal law, with existing processes to identify any noncitizens mistakenly included.