The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, September 25, 2026, issued a 6-3 decision allowing the Trump administration to resume using an overhauled federal data system to check the citizenship status of registered voters. The ruling stays a June lower court order that had blocked the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program after a judge found it violated federal privacy and administrative laws. The majority opinion stated that the lower court's injunction inhibited federal efforts to assist states in election administration, while the three liberal justices dissented, citing risks of voter disenfranchisement.
The Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system, established in 1986, was originally designed to verify the eligibility of noncitizens for public benefits and licenses. In March 2025, President Trump signed an executive order directing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Social Security Administration (SSA) to overhaul the system. This modification linked SAVE with SSA records to include natural-born citizens, permitted bulk queries of entire voter rolls, and allowed federal agencies to verify citizenship for election purposes.
U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan blocked the modified system in June 2026, ruling that the government "trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens" by combining and repurposing sensitive data. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the system is a critical tool for detecting ineligible voters and that the lower court's ruling threatened election integrity. Voting rights groups, including the League of Women Voters and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, argued that the system is error-prone and had already led to the wrongful removal of U.S. citizens from voter rolls in states like Texas.
The decision establishes a precedent for federal involvement in voter roll maintenance, which has traditionally been a state responsibility. The Trump administration has sought to use this data to create state-by-state lists of all adult U.S. citizens and has attempted to link DHS anti-terrorism grants to a state's participation in the SAVE program. While the Supreme Court majority noted that federal law permits "individualized inquiries" even during the 90-day period before an election when systematic removals are barred, critics argue the bulk-upload nature of the modified SAVE system bypasses these protections. A person erroneously flagged would notice the change through a notification from their county election office or, in some cases, by finding their registration canceled when attempting to vote.
Litigation regarding the long-term legality of the SAVE overhaul remains ongoing in the D.C. District Court. The Supreme Court's current order is a temporary stay that allows the program to operate while the legal challenge proceeds through the appellate system. The Nov. 3 general election is less than 40 days away, and while federal law prohibits systematic purges within 90 days of a federal election, the Trump administration and Republican state officials have argued this restriction should not apply to the removal of noncitizens. Further court dates or a final ruling on the merits of the privacy and administrative claims have not yet been scheduled.