In 1986, the federal government built a computer database called SAVE, Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements. The purpose was simple – when a noncitizen applies for public benefits the state govt can check whether the applicant was legally in the country. The SAVE system worked. Nobody talked about it for 39 years.

In March 2025, President Trump signed an executive order expanding SAVE’s use. The order told DHS to use the SAVE system to verify citizenship of registered voters and people registering to vote. The order instructed the Social Security Administration to share its records with DHS for that purpose.

Two months later, DHS launched the modified version. Two changes: (1) it now checks Social Security numbers against SSA databases. (2) it allows state and local authorities to run bulk searches; the entire voter roll at once.

Blue states sued. Slowly the cases went through the lower courts, then the appellate courts, until finally the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 the SAVE system can be used in the midterm election [RULING HERE]. “While the ruling gives the Department of Homeland Security authority to use the database ahead of the midterms, the court’s conservative majority noted that the impact of the ruling was blunted by another federal law — the National Voter Registration Act — which prohibits states from purging voters within 90 days of the election.” {ABC link}

If the states use the SAVE system, but do not purge their voter rolls for 2026 based on the results, the system still can be of value. “the justices’ action came so close to the upcoming election that the records can only legally be used on a case-by-case basis — and not for the type of bulk voter-roll matching that some states want to conduct.” {Politico link}

WASHINGTON – […] The court, ruling along ideological lines, rejected an argument that federal law prohibited the Trump administration from a revamping citizenship database to verify voters. 

In an unsigned opinion, the majority wrote that Congress, in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, authorized the “an information-sharing regime like the modified SAVE program.”

The majority also concluded that the Trump administration would suffer irreparable harm if they were barred from using the database because the lower court ruling “inhibits the Federal Government’s efforts to assist state and local agencies in the proper administration of the midterm elections.” 

Due to the National Voter Registration Act’s prohibition against purging voter roles this close to an election, the ruling only allows the Trump administration to conduct “individualized inquiries” to verify voters, rather than perform the bulk searches the system was created to conduct. As a result, according to the court’s liberal wing, the ruling “will likely have a minimal, short-term impact.” 

Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented from the majority, rejecting the argument that Congress allowed such a database. They wrote that the majority misreads the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act to override “the limits that privacy laws impose on the sharing of citizenship information with DHS.” (more)

While the ruling has limited value in the 2026 election, it can still be utilized as a tool (without disqualification) to identify the integrity of the voter rolls as they currently exist.  There is nothing in the ruling that blocks the use of the SAVE database from being utilized. Current law just says the results cannot be used to change, modify or purge the rolls.

It will be interesting to see if any state goes ahead and just runs the comparison to see how compromised their voter rolls are, without making any modifications to the rolls themselves.  I wonder if any state will do that?