Judge Sooknanan Blocks DOJ SAVE Voter Database: Halts Unlawful Use

• A federal judge blocked the Department of Justice from using the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database to remove U.S. citizens from voter rolls.
• U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan ruled the DOJ's use of the SAVE database was unlawful and an attempt to "decide who gets to vote."
• The SAVE database is known for "persistent mistakes" in assessing citizenship, particularly for naturalized citizens, as highlighted by a ProPublica and The Texas Tribune analysis.
• Common Cause sued after four U.S. citizens, including Anthony Nel, had their registrations wrongfully canceled based on SAVE data.
• Federal judges have dismissed DOJ lawsuits in 26 states that refused to provide voter rolls for comparison with the SAVE database, with one such dismissal upheld by the Sixth Circuit.

Every voter deserves to know their private data is secure and that they won’t be wrongfully denied their freedom to vote.

A federal judge has issued a significant ruling, preventing the Department of Justice (DOJ) from utilizing a national database to invalidate the voter registrations of U.S. citizens. On Friday, U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan determined that the DOJ's Civil Rights Division was unlawfully employing the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database. This system, originally designed to confirm the immigration status and U.S. citizenship of individuals applying for benefits, was being used by the DOJ to scrutinize state voter registration lists and identify individuals for removal.

Judge Sooknanan, an appointee of President Joe Biden, characterized the federal government's actions as a transparent attempt by the Trump administration to "decide who gets to vote." Her order specifically highlighted what she termed "startling arguments" presented by the Trump-era DOJ, including the assertion that "every American citizen who registers to vote is the subject of a voter fraud investigation... simply because they registered to vote." The court found that the defendants knowingly relied on an inaccurate database for voter eligibility checks while simultaneously downplaying the significant risk of voter disenfranchisement. This ruling effectively blocks the DOJ SAVE voter database from being used in this manner.

The core issue at hand involves the reliability of the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database. An analysis conducted in February by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune revealed that the SAVE system is prone to "persistent mistakes," particularly when assessing the citizenship status of individuals born outside the U.S. who have subsequently become naturalized citizens. Despite these known inaccuracies, the federal government sought to leverage this flawed system for voter roll maintenance.

This federal initiative prompted a lawsuit from the voting rights organization Common Cause in April. The suit was brought on behalf of four U.S. citizens—Anthony Nel, Haley Smith, Linda Duckworth, and Ruth Nasrullah—all of whom experienced the cancellation of their voter registrations after their respective states provided voter rolls to the Justice Department. Anthony Nel, a resident of Denton County, Texas, received a letter in October 2025 informing him that the Department of Homeland Security's SAVE system had identified him as a noncitizen. He was given 30 days to provide proof of citizenship or face registration cancellation. Although Nel's passport was expired, and he managed to renew it two months later, his voter registration had already been canceled. While his registration was eventually reinstated, Common Cause notes that he continues to harbor concerns about being deemed ineligible again in the future. Judge Sooknanan explicitly rejected the DOJ's assertion of authority to compel states to remove individuals under the guise of "voter list maintenance," emphasizing the federal government's overreach.

The Department of Justice had previously requested voter rolls from 49 states and the District of Columbia, intending to cross-reference them with its SAVE database. These voter rolls contain highly sensitive personal information, including home addresses, social security numbers, and voting histories. While 18 states fully complied with the DOJ's demands, a significant number—26 states—refused to provide their data. This widespread refusal led the Justice Department to initiate lawsuits in an attempt to compel these states to produce their voter rolls.

However, these legal challenges faced consistent setbacks. In all 26 instances where the DOJ sued, federal judges dismissed the lawsuits, ruling that the federal government's efforts were unlawful. Furthermore, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of one such lawsuit, reinforcing the judicial consensus against this federal government voter disenfranchisement strategy. Common Cause President and CEO Virginia Kase Solomón hailed Judge Sooknanan's decision as a "victory for voters," asserting that "Every voter deserves to know their private data is secure and that they won’t be wrongfully denied their freedom to vote." Judge Sooknanan's ruling, however, does not preclude states from independently maintaining their own voter rolls, focusing specifically on the federal government's attempt to mandate the use of the flawed SAVE system.

This ruling establishes a precedent against federal government overreach in compelling states to use the SAVE database for voter roll purges, especially given its known inaccuracies. Lawyers advising state election officials or voting rights groups should leverage this decision to resist federal demands for voter data and protect against wrongful voter disenfranchisement based on flawed immigration status verification.

Source: Original reporting via CN