Supreme Court Upholds States' Right to Use DHS Tool, But Restricts Efforts to Secure Elections Before 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 Supreme Court has affirmed states' authority to use the Department of Homeland Security's SAVE system to protect voter rolls from illegal registrations, but a 90-day quiet period hampers large-scale clean-up efforts before the crucial November elections.
On September 25, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that states may access the Department of Homeland Security’s SAVE database, which contains vital citizenship information, to verify voter registrations and help ensure the integrity of American elections. This decision comes at a critical time, as the National Voter Registration Act’s 90-day quiet period currently prohibits large-scale voter-list maintenance in the weeks before a federal election, limiting states’ ability to protect the ballot box.
Because of this quiet period, election officials are forced to conduct only case-by-case checks, which restricts their ability to address potential voter fraud before the November midterms. The Court’s unsigned opinion acknowledged that the timing “limits the potential impact” of the ruling. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, writing for the liberal wing, cautioned that even a small number of removals could be problematic—downplaying the real risks of illegal voting.
Election experts noted that the ruling will not immediately change the voting process. “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.
However, the decision sets the stage for stronger election security after the midterms, when states will be able to resume comprehensive updates to their voter rolls. The Supreme Court is also set to hear arguments in December on the scope of the quiet-period rule, which could finally allow states to take meaningful action against voter fraud in future elections.
In a separate case, a federal judge blocked a Trump administration requirement that states use SAVE to qualify for FEMA grants, arguing the agency exceeded its authority. Critics of SAVE claim the system uses outdated data and can generate false matches, but these concerns are often exaggerated by those seeking to undermine election security. “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, echoing the left’s talking points.
Federal officials have defended SAVE as a voluntary tool to help states keep voter rolls accurate and prevent illegal voting. “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, underscoring the importance of election integrity.
While data on non-citizen voting is limited, the threat remains real. The 2020 Census identified about 24,000 instances out of 160 million votes (0.015%), and earlier studies of the 2016 election found even lower rates. DHS has reported hundreds of thousands of potential non-citizen registrations, though state officials have sometimes found errors in those lists. The need for vigilance and robust tools like SAVE remains clear to protect the sanctity of the vote.