Judge's Reasoning
U.S. District Judge Susan Brnovich, a Trump appointee, determined that Arizona's statewide voter registration list constitutes a document not subject to request by the Attorney General under federal law. She dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice, stating that amendment would be legally futile, meaning the DOJ cannot refile with modifications to overcome the legal deficiency.
Broader Context of DOJ Effort
The Arizona dismissal represents the latest setback in an unprecedented nationwide effort by the Trump administration to collect sensitive voter information from tens of millions of Americans before the midterm elections. The DOJ has sued at least 30 states and the District of Columbia seeking detailed voter data. However, judges have rejected the DOJ's attempts in six states total, while at least 13 other states have voluntarily complied or promised to provide the data.
Privacy and Authority Concerns
Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes called the ruling a win for voter privacy, noting the database contained highly sensitive personal information. The articles emphasize that states hold sole constitutional authority to screen their voter rolls under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. Legal experts and officials have raised concerns that the federal government lacks authorization to collect such information on hundreds of millions of voters absent Congressional authorization.
Stated Purpose and Actual Use
The DOJ initially cited investigation into Arizona's compliance with federal election law as justification for the request. However, in the Rhode Island case, a DOJ attorney acknowledged the department intended to share unredacted voter roll information with the Department of Homeland Security to check citizenship status using the SAVE database. The DOJ has reportedly already shared obtained voter information with DHS for this purpose.
Effectiveness Questions
According to the articles, voter fraud is exceedingly rare, and even when screened using the SAVE database, there are likely very few potential violations out of tens of millions of voters. Analysis from the Brennan Center indicates the SAVE program has flagged legal voters based on outdated or incomplete information, increasing risks of erroneous voter purges and disenfranchising eligible voters. 
Answer