Four noncitizens have been charged with illegally voting in the 2024 US elections in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the Trump administration pursues measures to verify voter citizenship and strengthen the enforcement of federal election laws.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the charges on October 5, accusing the four defendants of knowingly casting ballots despite not being American citizens. The cases have brought renewed attention to US voter list verification, citizenship requirements for voting, illegal voters and the federal government’s efforts to identify noncitizens registered in electoral databases.
The charges come amid a wider legal and political dispute over the Trump administration’s efforts to use federal immigration records to assist states in verifying voter citizenship. On September 25, 2026, the US Supreme Court allowed the administration to use an updated immigration database to help verify the citizenship status of registered voters while legal proceedings continue.
The decision temporarily lifted a restriction imposed by a lower court on the use of the revamped Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system, which links immigration information with Social Security data. The administration has argued that access to the database is necessary to help states identify potentially ineligible voters and enforce election laws.
Four Philadelphia residents charged with illegal voting
According to the DOJ, the four Philadelphia residents voted in the 2024 elections despite knowing that they were not US citizens. The department said their ballots were cast in an election that included voting for the president, vice president and presidential electors.
Under federal and Pennsylvania state law, non-citizens are generally prohibited from voting in federal elections and must meet the applicable citizenship requirements to participate in state elections.
The four defendants were identified as Jamil Ahmad, Nighat Jamil, Paulo Silva, and Hacina Saadi. The DOJ said Ahmad is a Pakistani citizen who held lawful permanent resident status in the United States when he voted. Nighat Jamil is also a Pakistani citizen and a lawful permanent resident, while Silva is a Portuguese citizen who likewise held permanent residency. Saadi, a French citizen, was described by the department as an illegal immigrant.
The charges concern violations of federal election law governing noncitizen voting. Under Section 611 of Title 18 of the US Code, it is generally unlawful for non-citizens to vote in elections for president, vice president, presidential electors, members of the US Senate and House of Representatives, and certain other federal offices.
Pennsylvania law also restricts voting to eligible US citizens, with state requirements specifying that an individual must have been a US citizen for at least one month to vote.
If convicted, the four Philadelphia defendants face imprisonment for up to one year, fines, or both, according to the DOJ. The charges are part of the department’s broader enforcement efforts against illegal voting by non-citizens.
The cases have also placed US voter list verification and the identification of potentially ineligible voters at the centre of renewed attention as federal authorities and state election officials consider how citizenship information can be used to check voter registration records.
A separate case in Missouri involves a Cuban national who was arrested and charged with two counts of illegal voting in federal elections held in November 2022 and November 2024. According to the DOJ, the individual became a lawful permanent resident of the United States in 2009 but registered to vote in Missouri in 2004, before receiving permanent residency.
Investigators said that the individual subsequently participated in at least 15 elections over approximately two decades, including at least 13 federal elections. The charges concern the participation of a non-citizen in elections for which US citizenship is required. The DOJ has not identified the individual in the information provided in its announcement.
Supreme Court allows Trump administration to use updated voter verification database
On September 25, the US Supreme Court permitted the Trump administration to use an updated version of the SAVE database to verify voter citizenship while an appeal concerning the system proceeds. The ruling came after federal officials challenged a lower court order that had prevented the government from using the revamped database.
The SAVE system is designed to provide information about immigration status and eligibility for certain government programmes. The updated version connected information held by the Social Security Administration with immigration records, allowing government officials to access citizenship-related information when responding to requests from states. The administration has sought to make the system available to state and local authorities seeking assistance with voter list verification.
The dispute began after US District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan issued an order blocking the use of the updated database. The judge found that the federal government had violated privacy protections by disclosing citizenship information, Social Security numbers and other personal data through the restructured system.
Her order invalidated the 2025 update that connected Social Security information to the database. A federal appeals court subsequently upheld the restriction.
The Trump administration then approached the Supreme Court, arguing in a September 8, 2026, filing that the lower court’s decision restricted the federal government’s ability to assist states with citizenship verification.
The administration said federal officials needed to be able to use Social Security data internally when responding to state requests concerning the citizenship status of individuals registered to vote or seeking access to other government services.
Six justices supported the administration’s request to suspend the lower court’s restriction. In a per curiam opinion, the majority said the claims made by organisations challenging the updated database were likely to lack merit, including their allegations that the administration had violated federal law.
The justices referred to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which authorises the Department of Homeland Security to request and receive citizenship and immigration status information from other federal agencies, including the Social Security Administration.
The majority also stated that maintaining the prohibition would restrict the federal government’s ability to assist state and local agencies. The decision allows the administration to use the updated database during the ongoing legal proceedings.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. They argued that linking the database to Social Security information exceeded the limits imposed by the 1996 law and that the legislation did not override other federal statutes, including the Privacy Act, cited by the organisations challenging the administration.
Jackson wrote that the potential harm to eligible voters whose voting rights could be burdened or denied outweighed the harm claimed by the government from being prevented from using information it might not be authorised to access.
The Supreme Court’s decision represents a significant development in the administration’s effort to use federal immigration records for US voter list verification. However, the underlying litigation remains relevant to questions about the government’s authority to share and use personal information in determining voter eligibility.
Noncitizen voting dispute expands across courts and states
The administration’s efforts to prosecute illegal voters and expand citizenship verification have encountered other legal challenges. On October 1, 2026, US District Judge David Leibowitz in Florida dismissed a case against a Jamaican woman who had voted in a federal election despite being a noncitizen.
In his ruling, Leibowitz concluded that Section 611 of Title 18 of the US Code was a statute governing voter qualifications and that Congress lacked the constitutional authority to establish voter qualifications for federal elections under that provision. He wrote that the power to determine who may vote in federal elections was reserved to the states, subject to specific constitutional provisions.
The judge ruled that the federal statute was unconstitutional as applied to the Jamaican defendant and concluded that she could not be prosecuted under that provision. The decision raised questions about the relationship between federal election law, state authority over voter qualifications and the prosecution of noncitizens accused of voting illegally.
Government lawyers had argued that although states have primary responsibility for administering elections within their jurisdictions, the federal government also possesses constitutional authority over elections and may take steps to protect their security and integrity.
Their arguments cited a 1932 Supreme Court decision recognising Congress’s power to supplement state election regulations. They also referred to judicial observations that federal oversight was intended to prevent states from potentially abusing their authority over congressional elections.
The United States subsequently appealed the Florida district court’s decision to the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The appeal means the dispute over the application of federal law to noncitizen voting remains subject to further judicial review.
Data cited in the broader debate has also drawn attention to the scale of voter citizenship verification. An August 18, 2026, Census Bureau report suggested that thousands of noncitizens might have voted in the November 2020 general election.
Of the nearly 160 million people who voted, the bureau determined with high confidence that more than 128 million voter records belonged to US citizens and identified more than 24,000 voter records associated with non-citizens.
The figures concern voter records identified in the report and do not, by themselves, establish that every person represented by those records knowingly or illegally cast a ballot. Nevertheless, the findings have been cited in discussions about citizenship verification, voter registration databases and the use of government records to identify potentially ineligible voters.
Texas has also used the SAVE system to examine its voter registration records. Texas Secretary of State Robert Howden recently said the state had run the names of approximately 18 million registered voters through the database in the autumn of 2025.
The process identified 2,724 individuals who might be noncitizens, according to his statement. The figures refer to potential matches identified through the database and do not establish that all those individuals voted illegally.
James Percival, general counsel of the Department of Homeland Security, defended the administration’s legal efforts in a social media post after the government approached the Supreme Court.
He said the administration had been compelled to file an emergency petition to secure permission to use government data to help states prevent non-citizens from voting illegally.
The Philadelphia charges, the Missouri prosecution and the Supreme Court’s ruling on the SAVE database form part of the continuing US debate over illegal voting, citizenship requirements and election administration.
With the federal government seeking to assist states in verifying voter lists through immigration and Social Security records, the cases and ongoing appeals will continue to shape the legal framework governing noncitizen voting and federal voter citizenship verification.
