2026年6月22日 / 美国东部时间下午3:08 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
华盛顿讯—— 一名联邦法官周一裁定，特朗普政府创建包含美国人私人信息的中央数据库的行为非法，她表示该数据库随后被一些州用于错误地将美国公民从选民名册中移除。
华盛顿特区的美国地区法官斯帕克尔·苏克南南支持一个投票权组织和一家致力于保护隐私的非营利组织的诉求，认定特朗普政府的新系统违反了三项不同法律，该系统收集了美国公民的公民身份数据。
“总而言之，联邦政府故意践踏美国公民的隐私权，这种行为威胁到了神圣的投票权，”她写道。“本法院不能对此坐视不管。”
该法官推翻了特朗普政府对国土安全部维护的公民身份和移民身份核查数据库——即《系统性外国人资格核查系统》（简称SAVE系统）的改造。
本案原告辩称，特朗普政府将该工具变成了一个“可搜索的全国公民身份数据系统”，数据取自社会保障总署和国土安全部持有的记录。
苏克南南表示，本案的诉讼涉及两项旨在保护美国人免受政府过度扩张侵害的基本权利：隐私权和投票权。她还表示，本案记录显示，创建该信息交换中心的联邦机构明知其违反了国会数十年前制定的隐私保护条款。
该法官写道，特朗普政府“随意”整合并重新利用“数百万美国人的私人信息，包括其明知不可靠的公民身份数据”，违反了《社会保障法》《隐私法》和《行政程序法》，“未遵守合规要求”。
该数据库是多个联邦机构根据特朗普总统去年签署的一项行政令创建的，该行政令试图为选民登记人员增设新的公民身份证明要求。该行政令指示国土安全部和社会保障总署创建一个数据库，让州和地方官员能够有效核查试图登记投票的个人的公民身份或移民身份。
该行政令引发了多起法律挑战，其中关键条款已被叫停。
尽管如此，该指令还是推动了SAVE系统的改造，该系统被修改为纳入天然出生公民的记录，能够访问包括社会保障号码在内的社会保障总署记录，并允许使用该数据库的实体批量搜索记录。
为应对美国政府整合美国人数据的举措， League of Women Voters（美国妇女选民联盟）、电子隐私信息中心以及五名个人起诉了国土安全部、社会保障总署和司法部，辩称将多个机构的美国人敏感记录集中在一起是非法的。
原告表示，自SAVE系统改造完成以来，多个州与联邦政府合作，利用该数据库核查选民登记名单，并将被错误认定为非公民的人员从选民名册中清除。
特朗普政府为其使用SAVE系统的行为辩护，该系统自1986年起投入使用，称其“符合国会打破政府机构间信息壁垒的明确指令”。政府辩称，此案应予驳回，因为国土安全部有权对该数据库进行现代化改造。
司法部律师在法庭上表示，可能只有极少数归化选民在社会保障总署的记录中存在不准确的公民身份数据。但苏克南南称该论点是“转移注意力的幌子”，并表示传播不准确的公民身份信息具有诽谤性，部分原因是这意味着那些被不当从选民名册中移除的人违反了禁止非公民投票的联邦禁令。
她表示，特朗普政府的“相反论点近乎荒谬”。
该法官表示，改造后的系统以及国土安全部和社会保障总署发布的相关通知“违反法律、专断且反复无常、超出法定权限，且未遵守法律规定的程序”。
该判决可向华盛顿特区的联邦上诉法院提起上诉。代表本案原告的其中一个组织对此表示欢迎，称这是“美国人民和我们民主制度的重要胜利”。
“本案核心的数据被非法整合，违反了旨在保护敏感个人信息的隐私法，”民主向前组织总裁兼首席执行官斯凯·佩里曼在一份声明中表示。“我们很荣幸能与本案原告和联合律师合作，也感谢法院采取行动保护民众和我们的选举，尤其是在我国建国250周年之际。”
Judge blocks Trump administration’s overhauled database of Americans’ personal information
June 22, 2026 / 3:08 PM EDT / CBS News
Washington — A federal judge on Monday ruled the Trump administration acted unlawfully when it created a centralized database that contains Americans’ private information, which she said has since been used by some states to incorrectly remove U.S. citizens from their voter rolls.
U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan in Washington, D.C., sided with a voting rights group and nonprofit that works to protect privacy in finding that the administration violated three different laws with its new system that includes Americans’ citizenship data.
“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,” she wrote. “This Court cannot stand idly by while that happens.”
The judge set aside the administration’s overhaul of a database maintained by the Department of Homeland Security to verify citizenship and immigration status, called the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, system.
The plaintiffs in the case had argued that the Trump administration turned that tool into a “searchable national citizenship data system” that draws from records held by the Social Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security.
Sooknanan said that the court fight raises two fundamental rights that aim to protect Americans from government overreach: the right to privacy and the right to vote. And she said the record in the case demonstrated that the federal agencies that created the clearinghouse knew it violated privacy protections put in place by Congress decades ago.
The judge wrote that the Trump administration “flunked compliance” with the Social Security Act, the Privacy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act by “haphazardly” combining and repurposing “the private information of millions of Americans, including citizenship data that they knew to be unreliable.”
The data bank was created by several federal agencies in response to an executive order signed by President Trump last year that sought to impose a new proof-of-citizenship requirement for those registering to vote. The order directed DHS and the SSA to create a database that would effectively allow state and local officials to verify citizenship or immigration status of individuals trying to register to vote.
The executive order drew several legal challenges, and key provisions have been blocked.
Still, the directive triggered the overhaul of the SAVE system, which was modified to include the records of natural-born citizens, to access records from the SSA, including Social Security numbers, and to permit bulk searches of records by entities that use the database.
In response to the administration’s efforts to pool Americans’ data, the League of Women Voters, the Electronic Privacy Information Center and five individuals sued DHS, the SSA and the Department of Justice, arguing that the consolidation of Americans’ sensitive records from multiple agencies was unlawful.
The plaintiffs said that since the SAVE system was modified, states had partnered with the federal government to run their voter registration lists through the database and purged people who were incorrectly identified as noncitizens from their voter rolls.
The Trump administration had defended its use of the SAVE system, which has been used since 1986, as a “clear congressional directive to break down information silos between government agencies.” The administration argued that the suit should be dismissed because DHS had the authority to modernize the database.
Justice Department lawyers told the court that only a small number of naturalized voters may have inaccurate citizenship data in SSA records. But Sooknanan called the argument a “red herring” and said the dissemination of inaccurate information about citizenship status is defamatory, in part because it implies that those who were improperly removed from voter rolls violated a federal prohibition against noncitizen voting.
She said the Trump administration’s “arguments to the contrary border on the absurd.”
The judge said the overhauled system and related notices from DHS and the SSA were “contrary to law, arbitrary and capricious, in excess of statutory authority, and without observance of procedure required by law.”
The decision can be appealed to the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. It was cheered by one of the organizations representing the plaintiffs in the case as an “important victory for the American people and our democracy.”
“The data at the heart of this lawsuit was unlawfully consolidated in violation of privacy laws intended to protect sensitive personal information,” Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, said in a statement. “We are honored to work alongside the plaintiffs and co-counsel in this case, and are grateful that the court has acted to protect people and our elections every day and especially during our nation’s 250th anniversary year.”