U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan of Washington, D.C., ruled Friday that the Justice Department acted unlawfully when it gathered state voter rolls and checked them against federal citizenship data to press states to remove voters. Her 78-page opinion in Common Cause v. U.S. Department of Justice vacates the policy under the Administrative Procedure Act. CBS News reported she also found it violated the Privacy Act. A department spokesperson said it is "reviewing the decision."
The ruling decides, a month before the Nov. 3 election, whether Washington or the states keeps the list that says who may vote.
The case sits inside a year-long fight over who checks a voter's citizenship, and how. The department asked 49 states and the District of Columbia for their full voter lists, the opinion says. At least 18 states turned them over. Courts dismissed the department's suits against states that refused. In June, Sooknanan blocked expanded use of the SAVE citizenship database in a separate case. The Supreme Court paused that order last month, Reuters reported.
- The plaintiffs include four voters whose registrations were canceled, CBS reported.
- Federal law bars systematic removals from the rolls within 90 days of a federal election.
- A federal memo says SAVE can verify acquired citizens only "in certain situations."
Sooknanan, a Biden appointee, wrote the opinion. On the other side stood Attorney General Todd Blanche's department and the Department of Homeland Security, which runs SAVE. Common Cause sued with four voters, represented by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the ACLU and Protect Democracy. The people closest to the outcome are naturalized citizens whose records a database may not confirm, voters in the 18 states that shared their files, and county clerks who open early voting this week — Georgia's begins Tuesday.
Disputedwhether federal citizenship checks of state voter rolls protect the vote or exceed the government's legal authority over records the states keep.
The FramingsJustice Department framing presents the checks as enforcement of federal laws that require accurate rolls and make noncitizen voting a crime, and argued in court that errors are rare. Voting-rights framing (Common Cause, the ACLU) presents the program as a federal grab of voters' private data that knocked citizens off the rolls; Common Cause called the ruling "a victory for voters." States'-authority framing, the position of the states that refused the department and won in court, presents the voter list as a state record that Washington cannot demand.
The RecordThe vacatur, the Administrative Procedure Act holding and the count of "at least 18 states" are in the opinion. The judge called the department's low-error argument "factually inaccurate and legally irrelevant." Reuters reported the 90-day bar may limit the ruling's practical effect before Nov. 3. No source reviewed says the department must delete files it already holds. Confidence in what the ruling holds: certain. Confidence it changes any state's rolls before Election Day: low.
What to watch: A Justice Department notice of appeal or stay request in the D.C. Circuit. Georgia's early voting, which opens Tuesday. Election Day, Nov. 3.
Sources: Reuters, Al Jazeera, CBS News, Courthouse News, Common Cause (statement)
