DOJ Says Noncitizens can be Removed from Voter Rolls During 90-day Election Quiet Period

Summary: New guidance updated on October 23, 2026, from the Department of Justice on the National Voter Registration Act says the 90-day quiet period only stops large-scale, systematic programs that remove many ineligible voters at once. It does not stop states from investigating specific people and removing noncitizens (or others who were never eligible to register) based on individualized information — even in the final weeks before a federal election. A bulk computer match can help identify possible cases, but actual removals during the quiet period must rest on real, case-by-case investigation rather than the mass match alone. Full guidance: NVRA List Maintenance Guidance.

NATIONAL — States have to keep their lists of registered voters accurate. That means taking off people who should not be on the list, including noncitizens who were never allowed to register. There is a federal rule that limits how states do big, large-scale cleanups of those lists in the final weeks before a federal election. It is called the 90-day quiet period. This rule does not stop states from looking into specific cases and removing noncitizens.

A federal election is one where voters choose people for federal offices: President and Vice President, U.S. Senate, or the U.S. House of Representatives. These races appear on the ballot in even-numbered years. The November election is the general election; many states also hold primary elections earlier in the year. The 90-day quiet period applies to both primaries and general elections for these federal offices. Elections that are only for state or local offices (such as governor, state legislature, or mayor) do not trigger the same rule.

What the 90-Day Quiet Period Actually Does

Under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), states must finish any big program that systematically removes ineligible voters at least 90 days before a federal primary or general election. “Systematically” means doing it in a large-scale, routine way across many people at once — not looking at one person at a time.

Examples of systematic work include:

• Sending mass mailings to thousands of voters to check addresses

• Running large computer matches that flag hundreds or thousands of records at once based on shared data

These kinds of broad programs have to be finished well before Election Day. The idea is to avoid accidentally removing eligible voters right before an election because of a rushed, large-scale cleanup. If a state’s federal primary falls less than 90 days before the November general election, systematic work must stop even earlier — 90 days before the primary. No further large systematic activity can continue between the primary and the general election.

It Does Not Stop Checking Individual Noncitizens

The quiet period only covers those large, systematic programs. It does not stop states from investigating specific people and removing them based on individual information — even inside the 90-day window.

The U.S. Department of Justice guidance on this rule quotes a federal appeals court in Arcia v. Florida Secretary of State (2014):

The 90-day rule “only applies to programs which ‘systematically’ remove the names of ineligible voters. As a result, the 90 Day Provision would not bar a state from investigating potential non-citizens and removing them on the basis of individualized information, even within the 90-day window.”

In plain terms: A big computer run that flags thousands of people can still be used during the quiet period to identify possible cases. However, any removal during that period must be based on more detailed individual verification of the specific person — such as reviewing particular immigration or other records for that individual — rather than on the bulk match alone. Removals that rest only on the large computer run or a standardized mass process applied the same way to thousands of records are treated as systematic and must be completed before the quiet period begins.

The same guidance notes that courts have said individualized inquiries are permitted during the quiet period. States can also remove people who gave false information when they first signed up to vote (for example, noncitizens or made-up names). A federal appeals court in Bell v. Marinko (2004) said Congress did not intend to stop states from removing people who were never eligible and improperly registered in the first place.

Can States Run a Big Computer Match and Then Investigate Individuals?

Yes, but only if the individual investigation is real and goes beyond the bulk match itself.

A large computer run that flags thousands of people at once, followed by treating everyone on the list the same way (for example, sending the same form letter and removing those who do not respond), is treated as systematic. The DOJ guidance says the 90-day deadline applies to list-maintenance programs based on large computerized data-matching processes.

However, states can still use a bulk match as a starting point to identify possible cases. What matters is what happens next:

• If officials then do a genuine, case-by-case investigation of specific people — looking at particular information about that individual — and remove them only after that individualized review, that process is allowed even during the quiet period.

• If the removal rests mainly on the original bulk flag plus a standardized mass process applied the same way to thousands of records, courts and the DOJ guidance treat it as systematic. That kind of program must be finished before the 90-day window.

In short: the bulk match itself can help find people to look at more closely. The actual removal must be based on individualized information about that specific person, not just the large computer run.

How This Relates to the SAVE System and Bulk Uploads

The federal SAVE system (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) lets state and local officials check citizenship status. In 2026, the Department of Homeland Security expanded SAVE so states could upload larger batches of voter records and check them against citizenship data, including Social Security records.

The U.S. Supreme Court allowed that expanded system to continue operating while legal challenges play out (Department of Homeland Security v. League of Women Voters, 2026). In that decision, the Court noted that the NVRA’s 90-day quiet period limits programs that systematically remove ineligible voters, but it still permits individualized inquiries during that time.

Using SAVE for a large bulk upload and then automatically removing large numbers of people based only on that match would generally be treated as systematic work. That kind of mass process has to be finished before the 90-day quiet period. However, if a state uses the results only to identify cases and then investigates specific individuals — reviewing the particular records and making a case-by-case decision — that falls on the individualized side of the line and is not blocked by the quiet period.

The DOJ guidance warns that broad data matches by themselves (especially if they rely only on name and birth date or outdated records) can create mistakes. States are expected to use additional, particularized information before removing someone.

How This Applies in Arizona with the State DPOC Law

Arizona has required documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) for full-ballot registration since voters approved Proposition 200 in 2004. Full-ballot status lets a person vote in federal, state, and local races. An Arizona driver’s license or ID issued after October 1, 1996, is commonly accepted as DPOC because the Motor Vehicle Division verified citizenship when the license was issued. Other documents such as a U.S. birth certificate, passport, or naturalization papers can also work.

People who use the federal voter registration form and do not provide DPOC (and whose citizenship cannot be verified through state records) can still be registered as “federal-only” voters. They may vote only in federal races (President, U.S. Senate, and U.S. House). People who use Arizona’s state form generally must provide or have DPOC verified to be fully registered.

For removals, Arizona law allows county recorders to cancel a registration when there is affirmative evidence that the person is not a U.S. citizen. The process includes notice and an opportunity to provide proof of citizenship. The federal 90-day quiet period still applies to any large, systematic list-cleaning programs. Individualized investigations and removals based on specific evidence about a particular person — including confirmed noncitizens — are not blocked by the quiet period under the DOJ guidance.

Parts of Arizona’s 2022 laws expanding DPOC rules and list-maintenance procedures have been challenged in court. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case (related to Mi Familia Vota), with arguments expected in the term that began in October 2026. Existing DPOC and federal-only rules remain in effect for current elections while that case continues.

Other Removals That Are Always Allowed

The quiet period also does not stop removals when:

• A voter asks to be taken off the list

• A voter has died

• State law allows removal because of a criminal conviction or mental incapacity

• Officials are simply correcting a voter’s information

Why This Matters

The NVRA requires states to make reasonable efforts to keep voter lists accurate and up to date. At the same time, the rules try to protect eligible voters from being removed by mistake in the final weeks before a federal election. The difference between a large systematic program and an individualized check is how the law draws that line.

Full DOJ guidance: NVRA List Maintenance Guidance.

This explanation is for civic education only. It describes existing federal guidance and court rulings in everyday language so readers can understand how the rules work.

________

EZCivics.org is funded by our readers. If you found this news brief educational, consider chipping in to fuel our work by going HERE.