A federal judge struck down the Trump administration’s effort to expand the use of a database with Americans’ private information, including Social Security numbers—saying it “trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens”—as the database has led to eligible voters being improperly removed from voter rolls ahead of the November midterm elections.

Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan ruled the Trump administration must stop using a modified version of the federal SAVE database—which lets the government verify people’s citizenship status—with state governments in order to confirm people are eligible to vote.

The Trump administration expanded the SAVE database in response to an executive order from President Donald Trump, which ordered federal officials to share information with state and local governments about Americans’ citizenship status.

The expanded SAVE database now includes information about citizens who were born in the U.S., rather than just those who’ve been through the immigration process, and Americans’ Social Security information—but not all information in the database is accurate, according to evidence cited in the case, and may incorrectly flag some people as not being citizens when they actually are.

Sooknanan sided with voting rights advocates who sued over the database, ruling the database violates federal privacy laws meant to protect Americans’ personal information and Social Security numbers.

The judge noted states accessing the SAVE database has resulted in some citizens being kicked off the voter rolls by mistake—and slammed the Trump administration’s contention that such mistakes only impacted a “tiny number” of voters, writing, “‘Even one disenfranchised voter’ is one ‘too many.’”

The Justice Department has not yet responded to a request for comment.

The Trump administration “haphazardly combined and repurposed the private information of millions of Americans, including citizenship data that they knew to be unreliable,” Sooknanan wrote. “All in all, the federal government has knowingly trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens in a manner that threatens the sacred right to vote. This Court cannot stand idly by while that happens.”

The Trump administration is likely to appeal Sooknanan’s ruling, and it remains to be seen if a higher level court could put the database back into effect. The dispute threatens to kick voters off the voter rolls ahead of the November midterms, as Republicans fight to keep control of Congress.

In addition to the controversy over the federal SAVE database, the Trump administration has also separately been in court over its efforts to gain access to state voter rolls . The federal government has sought access to 47 states’ voter information, purportedly to remove people who aren’t actually eligible to vote, leading multiple Democratic-led states to sue in response. Judges in at least three states have so far ruled against the administration and found it does not have a right to demand states’ voter information, and questioned the federal government’s motivations for asking for such information.

Trump has long pushed allegations of election fraud, particularly in the 2020 election, despite evidence showing such fraud is exceedingly rare. One of the main fears he and other Republicans have expressed is of voting by non-citizens, even as research has repeatedly shown such fears are overblown and the number of non-citizens who have fraudulently cast ballots is miniscule at best. Critics of the Trump administration have expressed concerns that the federal government’s claims are instead a direct effort to help Republicans in the November midterms. The government has taken steps like expanding the SAVE database in an effort to more directly oversee elections, which are typically state-run. Trump has also signed an executive order targeting mail-in voting, which has led the U.S. Postal Service to establish steps states must take if they want the agency to deliver mail-in ballots, and Trump has so far not ruled out that he could try to send federal troops to polling places in November, saying in May he would “do anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections.” At least five states have passed laws aimed at avoiding federal intervention in elections as a result, CNN reports , and the lawsuit at issue in Monday’s ruling is part of a broader slew of litigation from Democratic-leaning groups challenging the Trump administration’s election efforts.

Experts alarmed as Trump launches broad-front attack on US voting rights (The Guardian)

Critics fear a midterm purge as the Trump administration promotes program to check voter eligibility (Associated Press)