Supreme Court Allows Trump Administration’s Voter Verification Program

The United States Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling on Friday, allowing the Trump administration to proceed with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ (USCIS) updated Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program ahead of the upcoming midterm elections.

USCIS Director Joseph Edlow had announced enhancements to the SAVE program last year, which is designed to ensure that only American citizens are voting in federal elections. Following this announcement, several left-leaning organizations filed lawsuits to block these updates, resulting in a lower court’s ruling that halted the program’s implementation.

The Supreme Court has now agreed to the Trump administration’s request to pause the lower court’s ruling.

According to the majority opinion, the revised SAVE program allows state or local agencies to verify an individual’s citizenship status by uploading the person’s name, date of birth, full or partial Social Security Number (SSN) to the SAVE portal. The portal then checks this information against Social Security Administration (SSA) databases for verification. Once a match is found, the SSA provides the results to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), revealing the individual’s full name, date of birth, SSN, and citizenship status. If the agency cannot confirm citizenship, it must inform the person and request proof of citizenship to maintain or establish voter registration.

Moreover, the ruling emphasizes that by aiming to prevent any interference with disclosing citizenship information to the DHS, Congress effectively authorized the DHS to receive such information, overriding any conflicting federal, state, or local laws. This interpretation is argued to resolve potential conflicts that could place agencies in a difficult position with regard to conflicting legal requirements.

As a result, the court granted the application for a stay, effectively pausing the lower court’s decision in furtherance of an appeal to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. If the higher court denies certiorari, the stay will automatically end. Conversely, if certiorari is accepted, the stay will conclude when the judgment from the Supreme Court is issued.

Justice Jackson expressed dissent, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, emphasizing the potential disenfranchisement of American voters caused by the new verification system. She contended that the alleged burdens on a few lawful voters outweigh any harm the government may face by being unable to enforce actions that it might not legally be allowed to pursue.

The case is referenced as DHS v. League of Women Voters, No. 26A308 in the Supreme Court.