Biden-Appointed Judge Blocks Trump Administration’s Nationwide Voter Roll Verification Program

A federal judge appointed by former President Joe Biden has struck down the Trump administration’s effort to obtain state voter registration records and cross-check them against federal citizenship databases, delivering a significant legal setback to the Justice Department’s election integrity initiative ahead of the November midterm elections.

U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan issued the 78-page ruling Friday in Washington, D.C., finding that the Justice Department exceeded its legal authority by collecting sensitive voter information and using federal databases to identify individuals potentially ineligible to vote.

The ruling targets a nationwide program developed under President Trump to identify noncitizens who may have registered to vote in American elections. Administration officials have maintained that comparing state voter rolls with federal immigration and citizenship records is necessary to strengthen election security and ensure compliance with existing voting laws.

The Justice Department had requested complete, unredacted voter registration lists from nearly every state. Those records included personal information such as names, residential addresses, birth dates, driver’s license numbers and portions of Social Security numbers.

Federal officials intended to compare the information against the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements database, commonly known as SAVE. The system is used to verify immigration status and other eligibility information for government programs.

The administration’s objective was to identify registered voters whose citizenship status appeared inconsistent with federal records. States receiving information about potentially ineligible voters could then investigate those individuals and determine whether their registrations should be canceled.

Approximately 18 states, most led by Republicans, cooperated with the Justice Department and provided the requested information. Other states refused, citing concerns about federal authority, voter privacy and the reliability of government citizenship databases.

The Justice Department subsequently filed lawsuits against 30 states and Washington, D.C., seeking access to their voter registration records. Federal courts have rejected the department’s position in 26 cases decided so far, according to reporting on the litigation.

In Friday’s decision, Sooknanan concluded that the Justice Department lacked statutory authority to establish its voter list maintenance policy. She determined that the program violated the Privacy Act and federal administrative requirements governing how agencies collect, maintain and disclose personal information.

The judge also found that federal officials had failed to adequately consider the possibility that outdated citizenship records could cause eligible American voters to be incorrectly identified as noncitizens.

One concern involved naturalized citizens whose immigration records had not been updated to reflect their American citizenship. Such individuals could be mistakenly flagged by federal databases even though they possess the legal right to vote.

The ruling cited examples of American citizens who had already been improperly removed from voter registration lists. Among them was a naturalized citizen in Texas who was incorrectly identified as a noncitizen before eventually having his registration restored.

Sooknanan emphasized that states retain primary responsibility for maintaining voter registration lists under the constitutional and statutory framework established by Congress. She rejected the Justice Department’s argument that existing federal election laws authorized its broader data collection and verification program.

However, the judge clarified that her decision does not prevent the federal government from lawfully assisting states with election administration. States also remain authorized to investigate voter eligibility and remove ineligible registrations in accordance with federal and state law.

The Justice Department has defended its efforts by pointing to the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act, which establish requirements intended to maintain accurate voter records. Administration officials argue that access to registration information is an important tool for enforcing federal election laws.

In a May 2026 legal opinion, the department’s Office of Legal Counsel concluded that the Civil Rights Division possessed authority to request statewide voter lists and share the information with Homeland Security. Friday’s ruling directly rejected the legal basis for that policy.

The lawsuit was brought by the government watchdog organization Common Cause and individual voters who challenged the collection and use of their personal information.

Common Cause President Virginia Kase Solomón welcomed the decision, arguing that it protects voters from improper federal collection of sensitive records and potential removal from registration lists based on inaccurate information.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which represented plaintiffs in the litigation, also praised the ruling. The organization maintained that federal election enforcement must respect established legal protections for eligible voters.

The Justice Department said it was reviewing the decision. Officials had not immediately announced whether the administration would appeal.

The ruling follows another decision by Sooknanan in June involving the administration’s expansion of the SAVE database. In that separate case, she blocked aspects of the federal government’s use of citizenship information, although the Supreme Court temporarily paused her ruling last month.

The latest decision addresses a different legal question involving the Justice Department’s collection and sharing of state voter records. As a result, the Supreme Court’s earlier intervention does not automatically overturn Friday’s ruling.

The immediate effect on the November 3 midterm elections may be limited because federal law generally prohibits systematic voter roll removals during the 90 days preceding a federal election. However, the broader legal dispute could influence how federal agencies and states cooperate on voter eligibility verification in future elections.

President Trump has repeatedly emphasized the importance of preventing noncitizens from participating in federal elections, where voting by noncitizens is already prohibited by law. His administration has pursued additional verification measures as part of its broader election security agenda.

The court’s decision does not change the citizenship requirement for federal voting or prevent investigations into specific cases of suspected illegal registration. Instead, it restricts the Justice Department’s ability to operate the particular nationwide voter data collection and verification program challenged in the lawsuit.

With the midterm elections approaching, the ruling adds another major legal dispute to the administration’s efforts to expand federal involvement in election oversight. The Justice Department must now determine whether to appeal the decision or pursue alternative methods of assisting states with voter eligibility enforcement.