Podcast Summary: The NPR Politics Podcast

Episode: States Use Trump Administration Data System To Root Out Noncitizen Voters
Date: September 15, 2025
Host(s): Tamara Keith (White House Correspondent), Myles Parks (Voting Correspondent)
Guest: Jude Joffe-Block (NPR)

Brief Overview

This episode explores a renewed and controversial push by the Trump administration and several Republican-led states to use a federal data system, known as SAVE (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements), to identify and remove noncitizen voters from state voter rolls. The discussion centers on the system's origins, technical function, potential for misuse, legal and privacy concerns, early results from states, and the entwined political motivations driving its adoption.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

The SAVE Database: History and Operation

• Origin: Established at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) since the 1980s to verify eligibility for government benefits.
• Recent Overhaul: Traditionally checked citizenship status for federal benefits using a name and “alien identification number.” Updated under Trump to become a “user-friendly tool for states,” now linked with Social Security Administration data, enabling checks of entire state voter rolls for citizenship status (Jude, 02:04).
• Expansion: Now potentially able to check all voters, not just those born abroad. This marks a significant scale-up in scope and integration of federal and state data.

Motivation and Intent

• Why this matters:
  “It can feel impossible to find your next favorite podcast and we are very glad you're here listening to the NPR Politics podcast. … Millions of voters have had their personal information put into a federal data system in search for non citizen voters. What did that search uncover?” (Tamara, 01:32–01:45)
• Assumption vs. Reality: Many assume such checks are routine, but electronic voter records are a post-2000 development, and states are still integrating data from Social Security, DMVs, and other sources (Myles, 03:15).

Scope and Early Findings

• Numbers So Far: Over 33 million voters have been checked through SAVE. DHS has not disclosed detailed results or security protocols (Myles, 04:07).
• Case Study—Louisiana: Ran nearly all active voters (approx. 2.9 million) through SAVE and found only 79 suspected noncitizen voters since the 1980s (0.003% of the roll). Slightly more were flagged as noncitizens registered but not voting (Jude, 05:01).
  • These flagged voters have a grace period to prove citizenship, after which their information may be sent to law enforcement.

Quote:

“Louisiana… found really low numbers of non citizens. They found 79 people who they suspect to be non citizens who voted in that state since the 1980s. That’s 0.003% of their voter roll.”
— Jude Joffe-Block (05:10)

State Participation and Partisan Dynamics

• Primarily Republican Initiative: All current participating states (Missouri, Ohio, Texas, Louisiana) are GOP-led. Some, like North Carolina and Mississippi, are hesitant due to legal or data security concerns.
  • “Definitely the states that have been most eager to jump in and pilot this new program have been the Republican-controlled states. But I will also note we've heard a lot of hesitation from other Republican states as well.” (Myles, 06:37)
• Concerns Over a National Database: DHS policy stores all submitted data for 10 years, raising alarms about effectively creating a de facto national voter registration list (Myles, 07:10).
  • Maine Secretary of State Shannon Bellows warns:

  “Because it's never a question of if a large database is going to be hacked, but when and to what consequence.” (08:01)

DOJ’s Involvement and Data Sharing

• Justice Department's Role: DOJ has requested and is receiving full state voter files. It appears DOJ is cross-checking this data, possibly running it through SAVE for “ineligible” entries, confirming a link between data submissions and voting fraud investigations (Jude, 08:35–09:50).
• Trump’s Directives: President Trump’s executive order directs agencies to prioritize rooting out noncitizen voting, despite evidence of such occurrences being “microscopic” (Myles, 09:54).

Quote:

“There is still no evidence that non citizen voting happens at anything but a microscopic level ... more than 99.99% of the voter rolls were citizens.”
— Myles Parks (09:54)

Unresolved Questions and Risks

• Data Security and Trust:
  • Concerns among election officials about giving DHS so much personal data (SSN digits, birthdates), and how long it will be retained (“10 years” per DHS).
  • Distrust heightened by the partisan control of agencies (“...unclear whether a Department of Homeland Security under President Trump is operating in good faith.” — Myles, 12:31).
• Potential Voter Suppression: Fears that eligible voters could be purged mistakenly without due process if SAVE returns a “noncitizen” flag. Past incidents cited where voters were wrongly deleted and only reinstated by court intervention (Jude, 14:34–15:43).
• Proof of Citizenship Laws: Some states require physical proof of citizenship to register; SAVE could provide a less burdensome, behind-the-scenes method, but concerns remain about accessibility (Jude, 16:01).

Quote:

"There could be misuse of the tool, that people could be removed if SAVE indicates... they might be a noncitizen... prematurely without due process."
— Jude Joffe-Block (14:34)

SAVE vs. ERIC: Competing Data Systems

• ERIC: Formerly a bipartisan state-led system for sharing data to clean voter rolls and detect cross-state voting, but abandoned by many red states citing security and misinformation fears.
• Irony Noted: Republican states leaving ERIC over data security now enthusiastically submit data to SAVE, a newer federal system with even less transparency about security (Myles, 17:25–19:03).

Quote:

“It’s not really clear that that same care has been taken in developing the SAVE database. At least none of those protocols have been made public to us.”
— Myles Parks (18:30)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Shannon Bellows, Maine Secretary of State on risks of a national database ([08:01]):

  "Because it's never a question of if a large database is going to be hacked, but when and to what consequence..."

• Myles Parks on the political trust gap ([12:31]):

  "...it’s just unclear whether a Department of Homeland Security under President Trump is operating in good faith."

• Jude Joffe-Block on the risk to eligible voters ([14:34]):

  "...there could be misuse of the tool, that people could be removed if SAVE indicates in their kind of, in a preliminary response that they might be a noncitizen, that they could be taken off the rolls prematurely without due process..."

• Myles Parks on partisan contradictions ([18:30]):

  "It’s not really clear that that same care has been taken in developing the SAVE database... And yet many of these Republican states are kind of chomping at the bit..."

Timestamps for Important Segments

| Timestamp | Segment Description | |-----------|----------------------| | 01:45 | Introduction to SAVE & its use for citizenship checks | | 02:04 | Jude explains SAVE’s history and overhaul | | 04:07 | How many voters have been checked; data security concerns | | 05:01 | Louisiana’s results: extremely low incidence of noncitizen voters | | 06:37 | Partisan divide in adopting SAVE; state reluctance | | 07:10 | Data retention concerns; national database worries | | 08:01 | Shannon Bellows’ warning about database hacking risks | | 08:35 | DOJ requests for voter data; connection to SAVE | | 09:54 | Trump’s executive order and the scope of noncitizen voting | | 12:31 | Partisan context—trust concerns under Trump administration | | 14:34 | Voting rights advocates’ concerns about wrongful purges | | 15:17 | Real example of premature voter deletions | | 16:01 | The encroachment of ‘proof of citizenship’ laws and SAVE’s role | | 17:25 | Myles contrasts SAVE and ERIC systems | | 18:30 | Discussion on data security transparency and partisan adoption of SAVE |

Conclusion

This episode exposes the complexities and controversies around the SAVE system’s expansion from benefits eligibility to nationwide voter roll checks—driven by the Trump administration’s immigration focus and persistent, yet statistically unsubstantiated, claims of noncitizen voting. While offering a potentially less invasive alternative to paperwork-based proof of citizenship, SAVE raises serious privacy, transparency, and due process concerns. The discussion highlights tensions between election integrity, partisan maneuvering, and voters’ rights, suggesting this tool’s ultimate impact will hinge not just on its technological robustness, but on the legal, political, and ethical frameworks governing its use.