In July 2024, I wrote about the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act when it was first introduced in Congress. And Sarah and I discussed it in an episode of Beyond the Bill Number which you can still listen to. Now, in April 2025, the SAVE Act has been reintroduced in the 119th Congress and passed the House, with a much stronger chance of becoming law given the current political landscape. It's time to revisit this legislation and examine its implications for American voters.

Read the IssueVoter analysis of the bill here for further insight and commentary.

What Does the SAVE Act Do?

The SAVE Act amends the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections. The acceptable forms of documentation include a REAL ID-compliant identification card, a valid U.S. passport, military identification with service records showing U.S. birth, a government-issued photo ID showing U.S. birthplace, or a combination of government-issued photo ID and secondary documents like birth certificates.

The bill requires states to implement programs to verify citizenship status and mandates that federal agencies share information to help states confirm citizenship. It also imposes criminal penalties on election officials who register non-citizens to vote.

Representative Chip Roy, the bill's sponsor, frames it as necessary to protect election integrity: "Secure elections are a key cornerstone for any representative government; without them, we won't have a country. Radical progressive Democrats know this and are using open border policies while also attacking election integrity laws to fundamentally remake America... we must end the practice of non-citizens voting in our elections."

A Solution in Search of a Problem

While the goal of ensuring only eligible citizens vote is important, evidence suggests the SAVE Act is addressing a problem that largely doesn't exist.

According to the Migration Policy Institute, noncitizen voting in U.S. elections is "exceedingly rare." A study by the Brennan Center for Justice of the 2016 election found just 0.0001% of 23.5 million votes cast in 42 jurisdictions surveyed were suspected noncitizen votes. Forty of those 42 jurisdictions reported no known incidents of noncitizen voting.

The database of election fraud cases maintained by the Heritage Foundation (a conservative organization deeply invested in proving widespread voter fraud is real) identified only 23 instances of noncitizen voting between 2003 and 2022. And according to the Bipartisan Policy Center, there were only 77 instances of noncitizens voting between 1999 and 2023.

Several states have conducted audits of their voter rolls. The Associated Press reported that states including North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, California, and Texas reviewed their voter rolls between 2016 and 2022 and found fewer than 50 noncitizens in each state had voted in recent elections, out of upwards of 23 million total votes per state.

These findings are unsurprising given the severe consequences for noncitizens who attempt to vote. Federal law already prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections, with penalties including up to five years in federal prison and potential deportation. The current voter registration system also requires applicants to affirm under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens.

The Real Impact: Creating Barriers for Eligible Voters

While the SAVE Act would likely have minimal impact on preventing the already rare instances of noncitizen voting, it could create significant barriers for eligible U.S. citizens trying to exercise their right to vote.

Elizabeth C. Matto, writing for The Hill, argues that the SAVE Act "would exclude millions of eligible Americans from registering and voting simply because they lack the necessary paperwork to satisfy its extreme documentation requirements." Many Americans do not have passports or ready access to their birth certificates, and most driver's licenses, even those that meet REAL ID requirements, do not prove citizenship.

According to research cited by the Bipartisan Policy Center, "more than 9 percent of American citizens of voting age, or 21.3 million people, don't have proof of citizenship readily available." The burden would fall disproportionately on already marginalized communities, including college students, people experiencing homelessness, and women who have changed their names after marriage.

This was evident in Arizona, which began requiring proof of citizenship to vote in 2004. Analysis conducted by Votebeat found that rather than catching noncitizens, the requirement disproportionately affected "college students and individuals experiencing homelessness—both transient populations that are more likely to lack identifying documentation."

Implementation Challenges

Beyond the impact on individual voters, the SAVE Act presents significant implementation challenges for states and election officials.

The Bipartisan Policy Center notes that the act "requires significant changes to each step of the voter registration process: how voters register, how their identities are verified, and how list maintenance is performed on an ongoing basis. These changes would be costly and time consuming, taking months–if not years–to achieve."

Despite these challenges, the act provides no transition period or funding to help states implement the new requirements. It becomes effective immediately upon enactment, and the Election Assistance Commission is given just 10 days to provide implementation guidance to states.

Previous attempts at large-scale citizenship verification have also proven problematic. In 2019, Texas Secretary of State David Whitley flagged 95,000 registered voters as potential noncitizens. The effort ended with his resignation after it emerged that tens of thousands of names on the list were legitimate citizens.

Alternative Approaches

If the goal is to improve voter roll accuracy while minimizing barriers to voting, there are more effective approaches available.

The Bipartisan Policy Center suggests improving data sharing between state departments of motor vehicles and election offices. In Colorado, for example, the state DMV shares daily updates with the election office, enabling them to continuously evaluate voter eligibility without placing additional burdens on voters.

The center also recommends expanding state access to federal eligibility data to make it easier and less costly for election officials to verify citizenship status when necessary.

Current Status and Outlook

The SAVE Act passed the House on April 10, 2025 on a largely partisan vote - four Democrats joined all Republicans to get it over the line. They were Reps Jared Golden (Maine), Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez (Wash.), Henry Cuellar (Texas) and Ed Case (Hawaii). The bill is currently awaiting committee assignment in the Senate. A companion bill has been reintroduced in the Senate by Senator Mike Lee. With Republican control of both chambers and Donald Trump in the White House, the bill has a much stronger chance of becoming law than it did in the previous Congress, particularly as Republicans have declared it to be one of their top priorities. It would require 60 votes in the Senate, however, to overcome an expected Democrat filibuster. Given the widespread opposition, this currently looks unlikely.

If it were to become law, it would represent a significant shift in how America approaches voting rights. As Matto notes: "Throughout the nation's history, constitutional amendments and landmark legislation ranging from the Voting Rights Act to the Americans with Disabilities Act have broadened the franchise making the promise of American democracy a reality for 'we the people.' As the nation prepares to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, it seems an unfortunate moment to undermine this promise."

While ensuring that only eligible citizens vote in American elections is an important goal, the SAVE Act represents a disproportionate response to a minimal problem. By creating significant barriers to voting for millions of eligible Americans, particularly those from marginalized communities, the act risks undermining the democratic principles it claims to protect.

As House Minority Whip Rep. Katherine Clark stated during the previous debate, "Despite numerous recounts, challenges in court, and deep-dives by conservative think-tanks, there has been zero evidence of the widespread fraud that this bill purports to target."

In the end, the SAVE Act may save us from a largely imaginary threat while creating very real barriers to participation in our democracy. As we continue to debate this legislation, we should ensure that any efforts to secure our elections don't come at the cost of excluding eligible American citizens from the democratic process.

The SAVE Act: Addressing a Non-Existent Problem at the Cost of Voter Access? was originally published by Bill Track50 and is shared with permission.

Stephen Rogers is a Data Wrangler at BillTrack50.