Will stricter voting requirements protect election integrity or suppress voters?
In the United States, voting is considered a fundamental right, protected by the Constitution. Since the 2020 U.S. presidential election, election integrity has become a heated and contentious issue, with Congress introducing hundreds of bills targeting voting procedures and access. One such bill seeks to heighten the security of elections by increasing the level of documentation required to vote.
Introduced in January 2026, the SAVE America Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to institute stricter requirements for voting, registering to vote, and changing voter registration, purportedly to prevent noncitizens from voting. Proponents claim that the bill is commonsense legislation crucial for election security. Opponents argue that the bill would block millions of eligible citizens from voting and place a significant burden on election administration by state and local authorities across the country.
The SAVE America Act builds upon and expands the scope of the similarly named SAVE Act, which passed the U.S. House of Representatives in April 2025 but stalled in the Senate. The revised bill passed the House in February 2026 and is currently being debated in the Senate.
If passed in the Senate, the SAVE America Act would require “documentary proof of United States citizenship” from individuals registering to vote or changing their registration. These individuals include both new voters and those voting under a new name, address, or political party. Applicants would be required to submit certified documents that prove both identity and citizenship status, such as passports or birth certificates.
Common forms of ID, such as driver’s licenses and state identification cards, would not qualify as proof, nor would most Real ID cards. Voters would not be permitted to register by mail or through a voter registration drive, but would instead need to register by presenting their documentation in person at an election office. Voters would also need a government-issued photo ID when casting ballots. Proponents defend these measures, stating that photo ID is a common requirement for ordinary activities such as opening a bank account or boarding a flight.
The Act would require states to use the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program to check the citizenship status of people against their voter rolls. Research shows that this system possesses systemic gaps, errors, and a history of flagging eligible voters as noncitizens and removing them from state voter rolls. Proponents of the bill have claimed that these gaps are not an issue and that provisional ballots could be provided to eligible voters deleted from the system.
Proponents of the Act insist that noncitizen voting is a major concern and that this legislation is needed to remove noncitizens from voter rolls. Experts, however, question these claims. Citizenship is already a requirement to vote nationwide. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 explicitly prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections, and doing so is grounds for deportation.
A mass of data, published by sources across the political spectrum, shows that noncitizen voting rarely occurs and does not impact election outcomes. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services acknowledged in a 2024 letter that “it is extremely uncommon for noncitizens to vote in federal elections.” A review by the Department of Homeland Security likewise found no evidence of widespread noncitizen voting. A study by the Center for Election Innovation & Research found that allegations of noncitizen registration or voting stem from mischaracterizations of voter data, and that existing election safeguards are effective.
A major point of opposition to the SAVE America Act is its potential to disenfranchise eligible U.S. voters. State-level proof of citizenship laws have been implemented in the past, some blocking thousands of eligible voters. The Brennan Center for Justice found that over 21 million U.S. citizens lack immediate access to documents proving citizenship and would face significant challenges in obtaining them. The University of Maryland’s Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement found that 2.6 million Americans do not possess government-issued photo IDs.
Applying for such documentation can be a costly and time-consuming process. A certified birth certificate can take weeks or months to obtain, depending on one’s home state.
Recent actions by the Trump Administration have set up additional barriers to acquiring a passport. In February 2026, the U.S. State Department restricted certain not-for-profit libraries from processing passport applications. A January 2025 executive order led to the freezing of passport applications with the “X” gender identifier, designed to accommodate intersex, nonbinary, and gender-nonconforming individuals. Lower-income and less-educated voters are more likely to lack the documentary proof required by the bill. Some commentators have likened the financial and administrative barriers that the SAVE America Act would create to Jim Crow-era poll taxes. The bill’s backers have rejected these arguments, stating that “it is an insult to suggest that minorities, women, or members of the working class are not smart enough to obtain and provide simple proofs of citizenship and photo identification.”
One major concern is how this bill would affect married women, transgender individuals, and others whose current names do not match their birth certificates. Proponents have claimed that married women would not face obstacles to voting, citing portions of the bill which direct states to establish a process for applicants to submit additional documentation to resolve discrepancies. The text of the bill does not, however, specify how this process will be carried out, nor does it say what alternate documentation would be acceptable, leaving the possibility for an inconsistent patchwork of state requirements.
Critics have raised concerns about how this proposed legislation would affect Indigenous communities. Although the bill recognizes Native tribal governments as valid issuing authorities for identification, the text requires federal registration documents to show the applicant’s place of birth, information that most Tribal IDs lack. Many communities are located miles away from any election office where they could present such documentation, and some older tribal members were born at home on reservations and were never issued a U.S. birth certificate to begin with.
Another consequence of the SAVE America Act would be the pressure its requirements could place on the election system as a whole. The Act provides no additional funding to election administrators, but it could potentially necessitate millions of dollars in implementation costs. New requirements could slow down or complicate the voter registration process. Election officials who have experienced heightened scrutiny and hostility since the 2020 election would face additional liability. The bill establishes criminal and civil penalties if an official registers a voter without sufficient proof of citizenship. Proponents of the Act dismiss these concerns, stating that it is election officials’ duty to verify voters’ eligibility and that requiring proof of citizenship would actually make their job easier.
Should the SAVE America Act pass the Senate, President Donald Trump, who has expressed overwhelming support for the bill, will likely sign it into law. The final bill, if approved, might also contain provisions not included in the original drafting that are unrelated to voter eligibility.
