A federal judge appointed by Biden has placed another legal barrier in front of the Trump administration’s effort to clean voter rolls ahead of an election. Judge Sparkle Sooknanan ruled [1] against a data-sharing plan even in states that supported the effort.
The policy called for states to share information with the Department of Homeland Security so voter rolls could be cross-referenced against a database of eligible voters. Sooknanan decreed that such cooperation would violate the Privacy Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act.
In explaining her order, Sooknanan declared, “DOJ cannot run roughshod over longstanding laws that were carefully crafted to protect the rights of the American people.” Sooknanan is a native of Trinidad and Tobago.
ANOTHER ACTIVIST JUDGE IS TRYING TO BLOCK SECURE ELECTIONS!
Judge Sparkle Sooknanan just stopped the DOJ from checking voter rolls against immigration databases to stop noncitizens from voting!
We MUST protect the integrity of our elections! OVERRULE THIS RULING NOW! https://t.co/7lbgDLrcrD
— Ryan Fournier (@RyanAFournier) October 11, 2026 [2]
Her broader statutory grab bag also included the Civil Rights Act of 1960, the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act. She claimed those laws “do not authorize the policy.”
The ruling creates another obstacle for the Trump administration’s election integrity effort. It also applies to states that supported sharing their information for the purpose of identifying potentially ineligible voters.
The US Supreme Court had already addressed several elements of the administration’s policy involving the US Postal Service. The administration had pursued that approach as an election integrity workaround after the Senate failed to pass the SAVE Act.
Last month, the high court upheld a preliminary injunction involving the new postal service requirements. The ruling reasoned that election season was too close for states to be forced to overhaul their policies to comply with the requirements.
Some states had already started sending mail ballots when the Supreme Court acted. North Carolina was among the states that had begun mailing them.
Importantly, the Supreme Court’s ruling did not prohibit states from cooperating voluntarily with the effort to check voter rolls for potentially ineligible voters. Sooknanan’s order now targets that voluntary cooperation with the Department of Homeland Security.
The judge’s repeated intervention has already drawn political blowback. Arizona Republican Rep. Abe Hamadeh introduced articles of impeachment against Sooknanan in July over her previous actions involving the SAVE Act.
I’m filing articles of impeachment against “Judge” Sparkle L. Sooknanan.
Her power grab against President Trump cannot be tolerated. Rogue judges like her are destroying the rule of law while communists undermine America.
We have the RIGHT to know that only AMERICANS are voting in our elections.
Americans elected Trump to lead, not the rogue judges who are behaving as activists for the communists cloaked in their black robes.
— Abe Hamadeh (@AbrahamHamadeh) July 6, 2026 [3]
Hamadeh’s articles alleged that Sooknanan had “substitut[ed] the judgment of a single unelected judge for that of the duly elected Executive Branch.” His complaint centered on what he described as judicial interference with executive authority.
“Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan’s egregious overreaching ruling blocking President Trump’s common-sense effort to verify the citizenship of those who want to vote in our elections was the final straw,” Hamadeh said in a press release.
He continued with an even sharper assessment of the judge’s conduct. “This is a blatant and unlawful subversion of the President’s executive authority and a direct assault on election integrity,” he said.
Hamadeh also called for accountability for judges who use their positions to interfere with the executive branch. “Judges who weaponize their bench to interfere with the President’s constitutional duties must be held accountable.”
Sooknanan is also facing an ethics complaint from the watchdog organization Democracy Restored. The group filed its complaint with the Disciplinary Council for the DC Court of Appeals.
Among other allegations, the complaint claimed Sooknanan had colluded with the Southern Poverty Law Center during Biden era efforts to enforce civil rights laws by targeting conservative organizations.
The latest order leaves the Trump administration’s voter roll effort blocked despite voluntary support from some states. It rests on Sooknanan’s conclusion that multiple federal statutes do not permit the policy.
The fight now includes the court ruling, Hamadeh’s impeachment articles, and the separate ethics complaint. For critics of the judge, the dispute is no longer merely about voter data, but also about whether an unelected judge has gone too far.