Supreme Court limits impact of DHS voter-list tool ahead of midterms
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
The Court allowed states to use the Department of Homeland Security's SAVE system to check voter rolls, but a 90-day quiet period restricts large-scale purges before the November elections.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Sept. 25 ruled 6-3 that states may access the Department of Homeland Security’s SAVE database, which contains citizenship information, to verify individual voter registrations. The decision arrives during the National Voter Registration Act’s 90-day quiet period, which bars mass voter-list maintenance in the weeks before a federal election.
Because of the quiet period, election officials can only conduct case-by-case checks, limiting any immediate effect on the November midterm contests. The Court’s unsigned opinion noted that the timing "limits the potential impact" of the ruling. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, writing for the liberal wing, warned that even a small number of wrongful removals could outweigh any perceived benefit.
Experts said the ruling is unlikely to change the voting process this year. "This decision will not have any significant impact on the 2026 election, as systematic voter list maintenance is prohibited within 90 days of a federal election, which the Supreme Court explicitly confirmed," said David Becker of the Center for Election Innovation & Research.
The decision may have greater consequences after the election, when states can resume broader voter-list updates. The Court is also scheduled to hear arguments in December on the scope of the quiet-period rule, which could affect future purges.
Separately, a federal judge blocked a Trump administration requirement that states use SAVE to qualify for certain FEMA grants, finding the agency exceeded its authority. Critics of SAVE argue the system relies on outdated data and can generate false matches, risking disenfranchisement. "SAVE was never designed to verify citizenship: it relies on outdated and inaccurate data that produces false matches, risks disenfranchising eligible voters, and exposes sensitive personal information to misuse and bad actors," said Tim Harper of the Center for Democracy & Technology.
Federal officials defended SAVE as a voluntary tool to help states maintain accurate rolls. "It’s remarkable that we had to file an emergency petition in the Supreme Court just so we can use government data to stop noncitizens from voting illegally. American elections are for Americans," said James Percival, general counsel for Homeland Security.
Data on non-citizen voting remain minimal. The 2020 Census identified about 24,000 instances out of roughly 160 million votes (0.015%). Earlier studies of the 2016 election found an even lower rate. DHS has claimed to have identified hundreds of thousands of potential non-citizen registrations, but subsequent verification by state officials has shown many of those lists to contain errors, with some alleged non-citizens later confirmed as citizens.