September 27, 2026 09:00 AM PST
(PenniesToSave.com) – The Supreme Court on Friday, Sept. 25, gave the Trump administration a win in its stated effort to keep noncitizens off the nation’s voter rolls. A divided court allowed state and local election officials to use a revamped Department of Homeland Security database, the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program, known as SAVE, to check the accuracy of state voter rolls [1]. The order came less than two months before the November midterm elections that will decide control of Congress [4].
Participation is voluntary, and 27 states currently use the system to check voter citizenship [5]. The immediate reach of the ruling is narrower than it may first appear. A long-standing federal law bans systematic voter roll purges within 90 days of a federal election, so the database can be used mainly for checks on individual voters before November [3].
For households, the decision touches two goals that tend to unite rather than divide: voter rolls that include only eligible citizens, and a process that never costs a lawful voter the right to cast a ballot. How well SAVE serves both goals now rests with states, county election offices, and the courts.
Quick Links
- What Did the Supreme Court Decide?
- What Is the SAVE Database and How Has It Changed?
- Why Do Supporters See the Tool as Important?
- What Concerns Have Critics Raised?
- Will This Ruling Change Anything Before the Midterms?
- What Steps Help Keep a Voter Registration Secure?
What Did the Supreme Court Decide?
The Court acted on an emergency request from the administration and issued its decision in an unsigned opinion, with the three liberal justices in dissent [1]. The order put on hold a June ruling by U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan in Washington, D.C., who had found the revamped version of SAVE illegal [2]. The administration is appealing that ruling and asked the justices to let it use the system while the appeal plays out [3].
The majority concluded that the database is likely lawful [1]. In its view, the lower court’s order kept the federal government from relying on the verification tool it considers most capable [1]. The Court also pointed to a 1996 law that allows DHS to seek citizenship and immigration data from federal agencies, and according to BBC reporting, it found that DHS must respond to states that request that information [5].
The majority wrote that the lower court’s order kept Washington from using “the program it believes is best suited to the task.”
Supreme Court majority opinion [1]
The ruling followed several turns in the lower courts. A federal appeals court had allowed Judge Sooknanan’s decision to stand before the Supreme Court overrode it on Friday [5]. The majority also suggested that the modified tool can be used in the period before the election for individualized citizenship determinations [3].
The decision is not the final word. The Associated Press describes the order as a temporary win for the administration [2], and the advocacy groups that opposed the emergency appeal say their underlying challenge will continue [1].
What Is the SAVE Database and How Has It Changed?
SAVE is not a new creation. The system dates to 1986, when it was built to help officials verify the citizenship or immigration status of people applying for public benefits [5]. NPR’s Jude Joffe-Block describes it as a roughly 40-year-old tool designed so government agencies could check the immigration status of noncitizens [3].
Accounts differ on exactly what the database held before recent changes. USA Today reports that until 2025, the system primarily searched DHS immigration records [1]. NPR reports that it once contained foreign-born people exclusively [3].
The bigger shift came in how the system can be searched. Previously, states could look up only one person at a time [4]. In 2025, the administration linked SAVE to Social Security data so that the citizenship of most Americans could be checked [3], and it allowed bulk searches using Social Security information [5]. States can now upload entire voter rolls to look for noncitizens or deceased individuals [3]. Votebeat’s Jessica Huseman notes that SAVE is also tied into several other databases DHS maintains, making it, in theory, a far more powerful tool than it used to be [4].
The system has seen heavy use. Tens of millions of voter records had been run through SAVE before the lower court ruled against it this summer, according to NPR [3]. Huseman cautions that SAVE is an accounting of the noncitizens DHS knows about, not a complete list of every noncitizen living in the country [4].
Why Do Supporters See the Tool as Important?
The administration argues that without SAVE, detecting ineligible voters becomes harder, which it says undermines election integrity [3]. Lawyers for the administration have long maintained that the system is lawful and necessary to keep noncitizens from voting [5]. The Justice Department told the Court that without intervention, the government would have to fall back on a slower and less capable verification process [1]. It also argued that any problems with how states use the database should be taken up with the states themselves, not the federal government [1].
Some state election officials describe practical benefits. Idaho Secretary of State Phil McGrane, a Republican, says all of his state’s more than 1 million voter registrations have been checked against SAVE [2]. Idaho began its checks in 2024, before President Trump’s second term began, and ultimately referred 15 cases of potential noncitizen registration or voting to federal prosecutors, McGrane says [2]. He adds that additional checks take place before any registration is canceled, that voters get 20 days to prove their citizenship, and that public awareness of the checks has a deterrent effect [2].
In Georgia, Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger has promoted his office’s work with the program and his recommendations for improving it [5]. He told the BBC that his office carefully vetted the federal data, even interviewing some flagged voters, and he says safeguards were in place so that no eligible voter was denied the right to vote [5].
Election experts offer qualified support. Stephen Richer, the Republican former top election official in Arizona’s largest county, called SAVE the only broad nationwide tool election officials have to confirm voter citizenship, and he said it should serve only as a starting point because it is imperfect [2]. David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, agreed and noted that states may find it useful alongside other tools [2].
What Concerns Have Critics Raised?
Judge Sooknanan’s June ruling laid out the core objections. She found that the government violated privacy protections Congress created to prevent a centralized data bank of this kind, and she said the government included citizenship data it knew was unreliable [1]. According to NPR, she also found that DHS had exceeded its authority [3]. In her view, the government knowingly disregarded the privacy of American citizens in a way that threatens the right to vote [1].
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent argued that the majority disregarded the harms the modified system has caused lawful voters [3]. She also warned that states might cancel the registrations of at least some recently naturalized citizens [4].
Justice Jackson warned of “the harm caused by burdening or disenfranchising even a few lawful voters.”
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissenting [5]
Critics point to specific cases. Anthony Nels of Denton, Texas, became a citizen more than a decade ago, yet he was flagged as a potential noncitizen when Texas ran its voter rolls through the database last year [2]. His registration was temporarily canceled while he replaced an expired passport [2]. Judge Sooknanan also cited naturalized citizens in Texas whose registrations were canceled because they did not respond quickly enough to the state’s request for confirmation [1]. In Travis County, Texas, officials found that at least 10% of nearly 100 voters identified as noncitizens were in fact citizens, according to U.S. media reports cited by the BBC [5]. In Nevada, Chief Deputy Attorney General Greg Ott told DHS this week that all 185 people it identified as noncitizens on the state’s rolls were citizens, based on the state’s own records review [2].
Huseman explains how such errors happen. Government databases do not automatically follow a person through the citizenship process, and their accuracy depends on people entering information on time [4].
The numbers found so far also run well below some federal claims. Only three noncitizen voters have been charged with illegally voting in Texas since the state began using SAVE last year [5]. In 2024, Texas Governor Greg Abbott announced that 1,930 people with a voter history had been removed from rolls of nearly 18 million registered voters [5]. The BBC notes that those figures fall far below the hundreds of thousands of noncitizen voters Trump and DHS have suggested [5]. In July, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin wrote to Nevada and three other states claiming that up to 250,000 noncitizens had registered there, a claim the AP reports came without supporting evidence [2].
Opponents of the ruling have been blunt. The League of Women Voters, the lead plaintiff, said the decision puts millions of Americans at risk of being wrongly targeted weeks before the midterms and pledged to defend the district court ruling [5]. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer accused the Court of favoring the president and warned that thousands of voters could be wrongly removed from the rolls [2].
Will This Ruling Change Anything Before the Midterms?
The calendar limits the practical effect before November. The National Voter Registration Act creates a 90-day period before a federal election that restricts removals from the rolls [4]. NPR notes that the law’s ban applies to systematic removals, and the government argued it should still be able to use SAVE for individual removal decisions right before an election [3]. The majority itself acknowledged that the law limits the ruling’s potential impact ahead of the midterms, while states can still check the citizenship of individual voters [5].
Twenty-seven states currently use SAVE to check voter citizenship, and every one of them does so by choice.
BBC News [5]
Assessments of what comes next vary. Huseman expects the ruling to reshape election administration going forward, but she does not expect voters to see any real effect during this election [4]. Joffe-Block says the picture remains unclear, noting that the federal government is investing heavily in searching for noncitizens on voter rolls and has threatened election officials with prosecution if they give ballots to ineligible voters [3]. She expects SAVE to serve as a tool in some of those efforts [3].
Local control remains an important check. If a state chooses to use SAVE, the county election administrator is still ultimately responsible for removing anyone from the rolls [4]. Votebeat’s reporting finds that county clerks tend to handle these matches more carefully than the federal government or many state governments, running second-level checks so that flagged voters are not removed unnecessarily in most cases [4]. With voting already underway in a number of states [3], that local layer of review may matter most in the weeks ahead.
What Steps Help Keep a Voter Registration Secure?
Because the county election office has the final say on any removal [4], it is the first place to turn with questions about a registration. Anyone who receives a notice asking them to confirm their citizenship has good reason to respond promptly. Some naturalized citizens in Texas lost their registrations because they did not answer the state’s request quickly enough [1], and Idaho gives voters 20 days to prove their citizenship before a registration is canceled [2].
Keeping citizenship documents current can also make a difference. Anthony Nels saw his registration canceled while he replaced an expired passport [2]. Since government databases do not automatically track a person through naturalization and depend on timely data entry [4], recently naturalized citizens in particular may want to keep proof of citizenship easy to find.
Checking a registration well ahead of Election Day, rather than discovering a problem at the polling place, leaves time to resolve it. States that use SAVE may also reach out to flagged voters directly, as Georgia’s office did when it interviewed some of them to confirm accuracy [5]. Taking those contacts seriously and keeping contact information current with local election officials helps the system work as intended for everyone.
Final Thoughts
The Supreme Court’s order gives states a powerful verification tool while leaving the choice to use it in their hands [5]. That structure keeps election administration close to home, with county officials serving as the final safeguard before anyone is removed from the rolls [4]. Supporters see a stronger way to confirm that only citizens vote. Critics see a system that has already flagged eligible Americans by mistake.
Both concerns deserve weight, and the record so far shows why. Idaho referred 15 potential cases to prosecutors after checking more than 1 million registrations [2]. In Texas, three noncitizen voters have been charged since SAVE checks began [5], while citizens like Anthony Nels were wrongly flagged along the way [2].
The legal fight is far from over. The lower court case will continue [1], and efforts to write similar changes into law through the SAVE Act have passed the House but stalled in the Senate [1]. The Court also rejected the administration’s attempt to tighten mail-in ballot rules on Sept. 15 [1]. With election rules still shifting, confirming a registration early is a simple step that protects a voice in November.
Works Cited
[1] Groppe, Maureen. “Supreme Court Allows Trump’s Voter Verification Database.” USA Today, 25 Sept. 2026, www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2026/09/25/supreme-court-allows-trump-voter-verification-database/91713466007/.
[2] Brown, Bridget, et al., editors. “Follow the Latest News on President Donald Trump and His Administration | Sept. 25, 2026.” AP News, 25 Sept. 2026, apnews.com/live/trump-xi-china-summit-media-ban-news-updates-09-25-2026.
[3] Joffe-Block, Jude, and Juana Summers. “The Supreme Court Revives a Controversial Data System for Citizenship Checks.” NPR, 25 Sept. 2026, www.npr.org/transcripts/nx-s1-5976804. Transcript.
[4] Bennett, Geoff, et al. “What the Supreme Court’s Voter-Citizenship Database Decision Means for the Midterms.” PBS News, 25 Sept. 2026, www.pbs.org/newshour/show/what-the-supreme-courts-voter-citizenship-database-decision-means-for-the-midterms.
[5] Debusmann, Bernd, Jr. “Supreme Court Allows Trump to Use Controversial Database to Check Voter Citizenship.” BBC News, 25 Sept. 2026, www.bbc.com/news/articles/ck05rrj3jeylo.