Supreme Court, over liberal dissents, lets DHS overhaul immigration database for midterms

The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Department of Homeland Security to put its revised Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) service into effect as litigation over the changes proceeds in lower courts. The emergency order overturns a June injunction by U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan, who had found the overhaul ran afoul of the Social Security Act and a federal law regulating disclosure of personal data.

The majority said the federal government must be able to respond to requests from state and local election officials seeking to verify voters' citizenship and expressed concern that the injunction prevented the government from using the program it considers most suitable for that purpose. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the court that the prior SAVE system lacked comprehensive data on natural-born citizens, was limited to single-record searches and required DHS-specific identifiers that states often do not have.

Three liberal justices — Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — issued a public dissent. Jackson wrote that the potential disenfranchisement or burdening of lawful voters outweighed the government's asserted harms from being blocked, signaling deep disagreement over the balance between election integrity efforts and voter protections.

The decision is not a final determination on the underlying legal challenges; the case returns to the lower courts for further proceedings. Practically, the ruling comes during a federally mandated 90-day quiet period before an election, which bars states from conducting systematic voter purges, meaning any removals must be handled on an individualized basis for now. Voting-rights groups, including the League of Women Voters — the lead plaintiff in the case — criticized the order and said they will continue to press their challenge to protect voting and privacy rights.