The U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily allowed the federal government to resume using an expanded version of the SAVE system for citizenship verification while a legal challenge continues.
In a September 25 ruling in Department of Homeland Security v. League of Women Voters, the Court granted the government’s application to stay a lower-court judgment that had blocked the modified system. The Supreme Court ruling allows the expanded program to operate while the case proceeds on appeal.
What changed in SAVE
SAVE, the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program, has long been used by government agencies to verify immigration and citizenship information. The federal government expanded the system in 2025 after an executive order directed DHS to develop ways for state and local officials to verify the citizenship of registered voters and people registering to vote.
The modified system connects SAVE with Social Security Administration records. State users can submit identifying information, including full or partial Social Security numbers, and the system can process citizenship-verification queries. The changes also permit bulk searches.
Why a lower court blocked the expansion
The League of Women Voters, the Electronic Privacy Information Center and other organizations challenged the changes. They argued that the expanded system violated federal privacy protections and other federal laws.
A federal district court agreed with the challengers on several claims and vacated the modifications. The government sought a stay, and after the D.C. Circuit declined to grant one, DHS asked the Supreme Court for emergency relief.
What the Supreme Court decided
The Supreme Court granted the stay. In its unsigned decision, the Court concluded that the government had made the required showing for the modified SAVE system to operate while the appeal continues.
The Court pointed to 8 U.S.C. § 1373, which addresses the exchange of citizenship and immigration-status information between federal, state and local governments. The majority concluded that the government’s position on the legality of the modified program was sufficiently strong at this stage and that the lower-court judgment interfered with federal efforts to respond to citizenship-verification requests from state and local officials.
The ruling is an interim decision. It does not finally resolve the underlying lawsuit or conclusively determine every legal challenge to the expanded SAVE system.
Three justices dissented
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. The dissent argued that the government had not shown that Section 1373 overrides restrictions governing Social Security information and raised concerns about the use of Social Security Administration data in the expanded system.
The dissent also highlighted the risk that citizenship information in federal records may be incomplete or outdated for some naturalized U.S. citizens.
What the ruling means now
For now, the stay removes the lower-court barrier that prevented the federal government from operating the modified SAVE system. Participating state and local agencies can again use the expanded federal verification process while the litigation continues.
SAVE results themselves do not change the legal standards governing who is eligible to vote. How state and local officials act on citizenship-verification results remains subject to applicable federal and state election laws and to further developments in this litigation.
The case is not over
The Supreme Court acted on an emergency stay application rather than issuing a final merits judgment after full appellate review. The underlying dispute over the SAVE modifications, federal privacy requirements and the government’s statutory authority therefore continues.
Further proceedings in the lower courts could address those questions unless the dispute returns to the Supreme Court at a later stage.