US law references in SIR hearing draw sharp rebuttal from poll panel: ‘Trump captured Venezuelan president, where is due process?

Some petitioners invoked provisions of US law to support their arguments, but the Election Commission firmly dismissed any such comparison

• Supreme Court hears challenges to EC's voter list revision in multiple states
• Petitioners allege EC's process risks unauthorized citizenship verification
• EC rejects US law comparisons, defends its authority and procedure

Did our AI summary help?

US President Donald Trump on Thursday figured unexpectedly, conceptually rather than in person, in Supreme Court proceedings as it took up challenges to the Election Commission’s special intensive revision (SIR) of voter lists.

The poll body is facing petitions from opposition lawmakers and civil society groups questioning the timing and legality of the exercise in Bihar, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu and other states, alleging it reflects collusion between the EC and the ruling BJP.

They further contend that the EC’s voter re-verification process, based on a narrow range of official identity documents, risks encroaching on citizenship verification, which does not fall within the Commission’s authority.

Some petitioners invoked provisions of US law to support their arguments, but the Election Commission firmly dismissed any such comparison. “Where is the US following due procedure of law? President Trump can just pick the President of Venezuela (Nicolas Maduro) for trial. Where is the due process, and now he wants Greenland also. Here, the petitioners want to import that,” said senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi on behalf of the poll panel, according to a PTI report.

Thursday's hearing on this contentious matter revolved around the court asking the EC if it had the authority to verify an individual's citizenship during an SIR exercise.

The Election Commission last year ordered SIR of voter lists in Bihar, a move that was challenged through multiple petitions, including by the Association for Democratic Reforms and the National Federation for Indian Women.

With no interim stay from the Supreme Court, the ECI continued with the process in Bihar. On October 27, 2025, it expanded the SIR to several other states and union territories, such as West Bengal, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, prompting further legal challenges.

The petitioners argue that the SIR's departure from the "prescribed manner" of revision under Section 21(2) lacks transparency and could lead to the arbitrary exclusion of genuine citizens.