Why It Matters
The Trump administration is pushing the U.S. Supreme Court to allow states broader authority to verify voter citizenship close to elections, a move that could reshape voter roll maintenance nationwide ahead of the 2028 presidential cycle. The case centers on Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship requirements and whether federal law permits states to conduct systematic checks for noncitizen voters within 90 days of an election.
What Happened
The Department of Justice filed a petition Tuesday asking the Supreme Court to take up a dispute between the Republican National Committee and Democratic and voting rights organizations over Arizona’s voting restrictions. The case challenges a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that found Arizona’s citizenship verification law violates the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.
Arizona requires voters to provide documentation such as a birth certificate or passport to participate in state elections. Those who register using the federal form without additional proof can vote only in federal contests. State election officials must cross-check federal-only registrants against a Department of Homeland Security database designed to identify potential noncitizens.
By the Numbers
The National Voter Registration Act imposes a 90-day pre-election window during which states face strict limits on removing voters from rolls. The Homeland Security SAVE system can now process millions of names simultaneously, a significant expansion from its original purpose of verifying benefit eligibility for individual noncitizens. Multiple Republican-led states have begun uploading entire voter rolls into the system.
The Legal Arguments
The Justice Department argues the Supreme Court should uphold Arizona’s law and rule it does not conflict with federal registration standards. The department contends the 9th Circuit decision eliminates flexibility the law grants states in enforcing voter qualifications.
RNC Chairman Joe Gruters said in a statement that federal law clearly restricts voting to U.S. citizens and defending the Arizona measure should not require extended litigation.
Opposition groups including the Democratic National Committee and Arizona Democratic Party counter that the state law exceeds what the NVRA permits. They argue Congress established the 90-day limit to prevent sweeping purges that could remove eligible voters without adequate time to correct errors. While states may remove individual voters under specific circumstances close to elections, systematic removals remain prohibited under federal law.
Concerns Over Database Accuracy
Critics warn the SAVE system has incorrectly identified U.S. citizens as noncitizens, raising concerns about expanded use in the weeks before elections. Justin Levitt, a law professor at Loyola Marymount University who previously served as senior policy adviser for democracy and voting rights in the Biden White House, said the 90-day period functions as a safeguard against last-minute mistakes.
Levitt noted that matching large datasets inevitably produces errors. Conducting systematic list maintenance shortly before Election Day could prevent eligible voters from casting ballots if misidentifications leave insufficient time to resolve citizenship questions.
Mi Familia Vota, a Latino voting rights organization opposing the RNC in court, characterized the Justice Department’s involvement as an attempt to disenfranchise Latino voters in Arizona.
What’s Next
The Supreme Court will decide whether to accept the case. If justices agree to hear arguments, a ruling could arrive before the 2028 presidential election. The decision would have implications for similar citizenship verification measures and the implementation of the SAVE America Act, President Trump’s stalled elections legislation that aims to expand proof-of-citizenship requirements nationwide.