U.S. District Court Judge Sparkle Sooknanan, a Biden appointee, issued a 75-page ruling on June 22, 2026, finding that the federal government “has knowingly trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens in a manner that threatens the sacred right to vote” and that the court “cannot stand idly by while that happens.” The judge ruled in favor of the League of Women Voters in their lawsuit against DHS.
What changed
The case centered on DHS’s transformation of the SAVE (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) system, which DHS overhauled to verify citizenship status using Social Security Administration data, converting the tool from one used primarily to verify non-citizen status into a national database capable of querying U.S.-born citizens using Social Security numbers.
Judge Sooknanan found that federal agencies did not have statutory authority to overhaul SAVE and that the creation of the expanded SAVE violated the Privacy Act, Social Security Act, and Administrative Procedure Act. The court order identified three targets: DHS’s October 2025 SAVE modified system notice, SSA’s November 2025 modified records notice, and the modified SAVE system itself. The order vacated and set aside those actions, which means the revamped federal system used for this citizenship check cannot keep operating in its challenged form.
Under Sooknanan’s order, the overhauled SAVE tool can no longer be used.
Why it matters
USCIS operates the SAVE system, and this ruling has immediate operational consequences for immigration practitioners and adjudication. At least 25 states used SAVE to check their voter rolls since April 2025 after the Trump administration significantly expanded its search abilities, and since then, at least 67 million registrations have been scanned through the program.
Judge Sooknanan found that some plaintiffs’ members were wrongfully identified as noncitizens and had their registrations canceled as a result. The judge found the administration “flunked compliance” with all three laws by “haphazardly” combining citizenship data the agencies “knew to be unreliable.”
For practitioners: the SAVE system in its modified form cannot currently be used for bulk citizenship verification queries. Any client matter involving SAVE-based citizenship determination or state voter roll cross-checks must account for this injunction pending appeal.
The administration is likely to appeal Sooknanan’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Until that appeal is resolved, the vacatur remains in effect.
Way forward
-
Verify current SAVE availability: If any client matter relies on SAVE for citizenship verification (benefits, voting status, etc.), confirm with DHS or the relevant state agency that you are working with SAVE functionality that does not violate the injunction.
-
Review state voter roll cross-checks: If representing voters who may have been flagged or removed from voter rolls via the modified SAVE system, preserve evidence of wrongful removal and consult appellate counsel about potential constitutional or statutory remedies.
-
Monitor the D.C. Circuit appeal: The government’s appeal brief will likely attempt to distinguish the statutory violations or establish emergency authority. Check the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit docket regularly.
-
Document SAVE limitations in client files: For any matter touching citizenship verification, naturalization, or voter eligibility, document the current injunction and that SAVE queries are restricted pending appeal.
Disclaimer
This article explains a federal court order and is not legal advice. The information is based on public reporting and the judge’s published order. Policy and court rulings can change without notice. Immigration and voting law are complex and fact-specific. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before relying on this information for any client matter or personal immigration case. Verify all information against the primary source linked above and the official court docket.