WASHINGTON, D.C. — A federal judge on October 9 vacated a Justice Department policy for collecting states’ unredacted voter-registration lists, comparing the records against federal citizenship data and encouraging states to remove people the department considered potentially ineligible.

U.S. District Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan ruled in Common Cause et al. v. U.S. Department of Justice et al., case 1:26-cv-01352, that the challenged voter-list maintenance policy exceeded the statutory authority claimed by the government and violated multiple federal legal requirements.

What the decision says

The court’s October 9 memorandum opinion found that the Civil Rights Act of 1960, National Voter Registration Act and Help America Vote Act did not authorize the challenged federal policy. The judge also found the policy arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act and concluded it violated protections in the Privacy Act and requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

The policy sought information including names, birth dates, addresses and identifiers from state voter lists. The Justice Department then used citizenship-status data to flag registrations for possible removal. The plaintiffs argued that incorrect database matches and unnecessary disclosure of private information could harm eligible voters.

Government position and limits of the ruling

The administration maintained that it was acting to help identify ineligible voters and enforce election laws. The court distinguished that objective from the legal authority and safeguards required for this particular federal program.

The decision does not prohibit states from lawfully maintaining accurate registration lists, prevent the federal government from taking other lawful steps to assist them, or make ineligible people eligible to vote. The judge expressly made those distinctions in the opinion.

What voters should know

The judgment addresses a federal data-collection and list-maintenance policy, not an individualized order about any particular person’s voting status. Changes to state registration practices should be confirmed through official state election offices, not assumed from headlines about this litigation.

What SNN will follow: any appeal, stay request, changed federal policy, or state election-office notice explaining how the ruling affects procedures.

Primary source: U.S. District Court memorandum opinion, October 9, 2026 (Filing 51). Additional reporting: Reuters.