Two advocacy groups have sued Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose over a 2025 law that requires monthly checks of the state’s voter rolls for suspected noncitizens, arguing the process risks stripping eligible, naturalized citizens of their right to vote just months before the midterms. The case, filed February 13, 2026, is one of several lawsuits nationally challenging a wave of state citizenship-verification laws.
The law at the center of the dispute
Ohio’s Senate Bill 293, enacted in 2025, directs election officials to cross-check voter registration records monthly against state and federal databases, including motor vehicle records and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ SAVE database. Registrations flagged as belonging to noncitizens are to be canceled under the law’s procedures, part of a broader push by Republican-led legislatures to tighten citizenship verification in the wake of unsubstantiated claims of noncitizen voting.
Who is suing and why
The League of Women Voters of Ohio and the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ Northern Ohio chapter brought the suit against LaRose. Their complaint argues SB 293 conflicts with the National Voter Registration Act’s 90-day ‘quiet period,’ a federal provision that bars systematic voter-roll purges within 90 days of a federal election precisely to prevent last-minute errors from disenfranchising eligible voters. The complaint also raises a Fourteenth Amendment due-process claim, arguing that canceling registrations without adequate notice or a chance to respond is unconstitutional.
The data-accuracy problem
Central to the plaintiffs’ case is a warning that the databases Ohio relies on are often unreliable for citizenship status, particularly for naturalized citizens whose records may not reflect their current status. The complaint states that ‘naturalized citizens are at heightened risk of being wrongly flagged and removed,’ and alleges that under SB 293, flagged voters could have their registrations canceled ‘without prior notice or any opportunity to respond’ — a process the plaintiffs say all but guarantees eligible citizens will be wrongly purged.
The state’s position
LaRose and supporters of SB 293 have framed the law as a straightforward integrity measure, arguing that states have both the authority and the obligation to keep voter rolls accurate and to remove ineligible registrants. Proponents of citizenship-verification laws nationally argue that cross-referencing government databases is a reasonable, low-cost safeguard rather than a tool of disenfranchisement, and that voters mistakenly flagged can re-register before an election.
Part of a larger pattern
Ohio is not alone. Texas, Alabama and other states have enacted or attempted similar noncitizen voter-purge programs in the past two years, each drawing comparable legal challenges from voting rights organizations invoking the NVRA’s quiet-period protections. Courts in several of these cases have yet to rule definitively, leaving the legal status of citizenship-verification purges unsettled heading into a midterm cycle where control of Congress is closely contested.
What’s next
The plaintiffs are seeking a permanent injunction blocking LaRose from carrying out the citizenship-based purge program. As of this fall, the case remains in its early stages, with no ruling yet on the merits. With Ohio’s voter rolls subject to monthly review under SB 293 and the general election fast approaching, the outcome could determine whether thousands of Ohioans face last-minute registration problems — and will likely influence how other states defend or revise similar purge laws already facing their own court challenges.
Photo: James St. John / BY via flickr
