politics
Federal judges issue conflicting rulings on DHS voter database access
Two U.S. district judges reached opposite conclusions on whether the Department of Homeland Security must maintain expanded access to the SAVE citizenship verification system for four states. One order blocked nationwide changes; the second directed restoration of features for Florida, Ohio, Iowa, and Indiana.
Jul 10, 5:00 AM·1m read1 source
Washington ExaminerAudio version
Tap play to generate a narrated version.
Developing·Limited corroboration so far. This page will refresh as more sources emerge.
Two federal judges issued conflicting orders on the Department of Homeland Security's use of the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements database, known as SAVE, for state voter-roll checks. U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan blocked modified SAVE features nationwide on June 22.
The ruling followed arguments from voting rights and privacy groups that the changes exposed Social Security data and risked misidentifying eligible voters. U.S. District Judge T. Kent Wetherell II ordered DHS on Tuesday to restore bulk searches and Social Security number checks for Florida, Ohio, Iowa, and Indiana.
Wetherell found that disabling those features to follow Sooknanan's order violated a prior settlement agreement with the four states.
Background of the cases Florida sued the department in 2024, alleging inadequate responses to citizenship verification requests. After the change in administration, DHS settled with Florida and three other states, agreeing to keep the expanded SAVE tools in place.
The Washington, D.C., case was filed separately by advocacy groups under the Privacy Act, the Social Security Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Sooknanan rejected the administration's request Wednesday to stay her order pending appeal.
Legal arguments presented Wetherell wrote that compliance with the other judge's order did not excuse the breach of the settlement. He stated he was not persuaded that his order should yield. Sooknanan said Wetherell erred in making merits determinations about SAVE's legality.
