Emergency application
Voter checks using federal data
Department of Homeland Security v. League of Women Voters
What did the Court do?
The Court granted the request on September 25, 2026: the lower court's ruling is on hold while the appeal continues.
Emergency rulings are temporary and do not decide the underlying case. Justice Jackson, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan would have ruled the other way.
What's being asked
The federal government, including the Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration, asks the Supreme Court to pause a District Court order. It says the order wiped out its authority to use Social Security data through the modified SAVE system. The government argues that this authority matters to upcoming elections. The League of Women Voters and other organizations challenge the government's use of that data.
What the Court did
The Court gave the government emergency help: it granted (approved) the request and put the June 22 District Court order on hold (stayed it). The pause covers the D.C. Circuit appeal and any timely Supreme Court review request; it does not decide who wins. The Court published no vote count; Justice Jackson dissented (disagreed with the result), and Justices Sotomayor and Kagan signed on to her dissent.
- Dissented
- Wrote separately
- Vote not published
- Dissenting · 3recorded against the Court's order
What it means
This is temporary emergency relief, not a final decision on who wins; the appeal continues in the D.C. Circuit. No related Supreme Court case is listed, and the Court set no argument date for this application.
Separate writings
- Read (PDF)
Justice Jackson, joined by Justice Kagan and Justice Sotomayor, dissenting
Sources
Facts on this page come from the Supreme Court docket, orders, and opinions for No. 26A308. The answers restate that record in plain words; explainer copy is written from the record and the filings only.