Skip to content
Chimera readability score 0.5556 out of 100, reading level.

The Department of Justice acknowledged in court Thursday that it plans to share voter registration data it gets from states with the Department of Homeland Security, so that the data can be run through a U.S. citizenship check housed at DHS.
The disclosure came during a federal court hearing in Rhode Island. The state is one of more than two dozen that have been sued by the DOJ for rejecting the department's request for sensitive voter data.
The admission was first reported by CBS News. The Rhode Island secretary of state's office on Friday confirmed the account with NPR, but had no further comment. A transcript of the court proceedings was not yet available. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to NPR's request for comment.
Last year, the Trump administration overhauled a DHS data system known as SAVE into a controversial citizenship lookup tool that can use a person's name, date of birth and Social Security number to verify citizenship. Over the past year, federal officials have been urging states to run their voter rolls through the upgraded SAVE system to check whether any noncitizens appear on their voter rolls.
A number of states, including Texas and Louisiana, have run their entire voting lists through the system and found very small numbers of potential noncitizens on their rolls — matching state-level reviews. But some U.S. citizens have also been inaccurately flagged by SAVE, which has compounded concerns by voting rights advocates that the use of SAVE will disenfranchise eligible voters.
In its lawsuits against states, the Justice Department has cited federal laws and a goal of ensuring states are conducting proper voter roll maintenance. So far federal judges in California, Oregon and Michigan have dismissed DOJ's lawsuits in those states, with the California judge calling the government's request "unprecedented and illegal."
For months, state officials and voting rights advocates have said it's an open question whether at least part of DOJ's motivation for receiving voter roll data from states was to share that data with DHS and run voters through SAVE.
Previous public statements by federal officials about whether DOJ planned to share voter roll data with DHS to search for noncitizens have been unclear.
Last November, 10 Democratic secretaries of state called on the heads of both agencies to clarify what they called "contradictory" statements on the subject.
"DOJ's revelation in the Rhode Island hearing seem to confirm what CLC and others have argued in courts across the country – that the federal government's efforts to obtain voter rolls is part of a larger project to supplant the states' constitutional authority to administer elections and maintain voter rolls," Dan Lenz, senior legal counsel for strategic litigation at the Campaign Legal Center, a voting rights group, said in a statement.
He added that the concession in Rhode Island "continues to raise serious concerns about whether the administration is complying with the Privacy Act and other data protections."
The Justice Department has yet to make any public announcements about a data sharing agreement with DHS or provide an opportunity for the public to comment about the plan, which is required under the Privacy Act before data is shared.

Facts Only

Actors: Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security
Actions: Requesting and sharing sensitive voter data, overhauling SAVE system, creating citizenship lookup tool, running voter rolls through SAVE system
Events: Federal court hearing in Rhode Island, lawsuits against states by DOJ, matching state-level reviews, inaccurate flagging of U.S. citizens by SAVE
Timeline: Over the past year
Locations: Rhode Island (federal court hearing), multiple states (lawsuits and voter data requests)

Executive Summary

In a federal court hearing in Rhode Island, the Department of Justice (DOJ) admitted that it plans to share sensitive voter data with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The DOJ has been requesting such data from over two dozen states, some of which have sued the department over the issue. The goal is to verify citizenship using a U.S. citizenship check housed at DHS. Last year, the Trump administration overhauled a DHS data system known as SAVE to create a controversial citizenship lookup tool that can be used to verify citizenship with a person's name, date of birth, and Social Security number. Some states have run their voter rolls through this system but concerns have been raised about potential disenfranchisement of eligible voters due to inaccurate flagging. The DOJ has yet to make any public announcements about a data sharing agreement with DHS or provide an opportunity for the public to comment.

Full Take

Steelman: The DOJ's plan to share sensitive voter data with DHS is aimed at verifying citizenship using a U.S. citizenship check housed at DHS, which was overhauled last year from the SAVE system to create a controversial lookup tool. This move comes amid lawsuits against several states by the DOJ for rejecting its requests for sensitive voter data.
Patterns detected: ARC-0024 Ambiguity (the article does not clarify why some states have been sued and others haven't), ARC-0031 Bandwagon Appeal (the DOJ cites federal laws and the goal of ensuring proper voter roll maintenance)
Root Cause: The issue revolves around the administration's efforts to ensure that only U.S. citizens are on voting rolls, but concerns have been raised about potential disenfranchisement of eligible voters due to inaccurate flagging by the SAVE system.
Implications: If the data sharing agreement goes through, it could lead to increased scrutiny and potential disenfranchisement of eligible voters. Those opposed argue that it undermines states' constitutional authority to administer elections and maintain voter rolls.
Bridge Questions: What are the motives behind the DOJ's requests for sensitive voter data from states? How effective will the SAVE system be in verifying citizenship without disenfranchising eligible voters? What safeguards are in place to protect the privacy of individuals' data during this process?

Sentinel — Human

Confidence

The text displays signs of a human writer, with varying sentence lengths, personal voice, and stylistic fingerprint. However, the presence of a few mechanical phrases could be due to editing or rephrasing for journalistic style.

Signals Detected
low severity: Sentence length variance
high severity: Evidence of personal voice and stylistic fingerprint
low severity: No matching argumentative skeleton or talking points
Human Indicators
Use of personal pronouns such as 'it' and 'their'
Inevitable human errors in the form of unbalanced phrasing or syntax