Judge Rules Trump-Era SAVE Voter Database Violated Privacy Laws
A federal judge ruled the Trump-era SAVE voter database unlawful for privacy violations on June 22, 2026.
Why it matters: Legal professionals working with election data and government compliance must reassess handling of sensitive voter information to avoid similar violations and ensure adherence to privacy laws.
- On June 22, 2026, Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan found the SAVE database violated the Privacy Act and Administrative Procedure Act.
- The SAVE program scanned over 67 million voter registrations across 25 states since April 2025.
- About 21,000 registrants—less than 1%—were flagged as potential noncitizens, raising concerns over accuracy and wrongful disenfranchisement.
- The lawsuit was filed by the League of Women Voters and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, challenging data aggregation practices.
On June 22, 2026, U.S. District Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan ruled the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program unlawful due to violations of the Privacy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. The court found that the Trump administration's expansion repurposed the SAVE database beyond its original intent, causing legal and privacy concerns.
Since April 2025, the SAVE system was used to scan more than 67 million voter registrations across 25 states to verify voter eligibility. Approximately 21,000 individuals were flagged as potential noncitizens, accounting for less than 1% of scanned registrations. Plaintiffs raised issues regarding the database's accuracy and the potential for wrongful voter challenges.
The lawsuit was brought by the League of Women Voters and the Electronic Privacy Information Center. They argued that combining sensitive immigration data with voter information without proper safeguards violated constitutional privacy rights. Judge Sooknanan emphasized in her ruling that the government failed to protect citizens’ privacy rights throughout the program.
The Department of Homeland Security disagreed with the ruling. DHS General Counsel James Percival expressed concern that the decision hampers the agency's efforts to address illegal voting. His statement highlighted ongoing tensions in balancing election security with privacy protections.
The ruling underscores the importance for legal teams advising government entities and corporations to carefully navigate privacy compliance when handling voter data. It signals a need to review policies involving publicly funded programs that collect or use sensitive personal information to avoid similar legal risks.
By the numbers:
- 67 million — voter registrations scanned by SAVE across 25 states since April 2025
- 21,000 — registrants flagged as potential noncitizens, representing less than 1% of the total
Yes, but: DHS notes the ruling could impede efforts to prevent illegal voting, underscoring a tension between election security and privacy rights.
What's next: Legal professionals should watch for DHS and other agencies’ responses and potential policy revisions following the ruling.