Republicans believe that the new bill is crucial to prevent non-U.S. citizens from voting, while Democrats are concerned that it could lead to the exclusion of millions of eligible voters.
In Washington, the House recently passed a key piece of Republican legislation aimed at mandating proof of U.S. citizenship during the voter registration process for federal elections, a major initiative supported by President Donald Trump.
Despite strong opposition from Democrats, the bill garnered enough votes to pass. Democrats argue that the requirement for citizenship documentation could potentially disenfranchise a significant portion of the American population who may face challenges in obtaining the necessary paperwork.
Trump has long signaled a desire to change how elections are run in the U.S. and last month issued a sweeping executive order that included a citizenship requirement among other election-related changes.
Republicans argued the legislation, known as the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, is necessary to ensure only citizens vote in U.S. elections and would cement Trump’s order into law.
U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil, a Wisconsin Republican who chairs the House committee that handles election legislation, said during Thursday’s debate that the bill is meant to “restore Americans’ confidence in our elections” and prevent noncitizens from voting.
This marks Republicans’ second attempt at passing the SAVE Act. It passed the House last year but failed in the Senate amid Democratic opposition.
It’s unlikely to fare any better this year. While Republicans won control of the Senate last fall, they have a narrow majority that falls short of the 60 votes they would need to overcome a filibuster.
Republicans hammered on the issue during last year’s presidential election, even though voting by noncitizens is rare, already is illegal and can lead to felony charges and deportation.
The SAVE Act would require all applicants using the federal voter registration form to provide documentary proof of citizenship in person at their local election office. Among the acceptable documents are a valid U.S. passport and a government-issued photo ID card presented alongside a certified birth certificate.
Democrats and voting rights groups warn the legislation could lead to widespread voter disenfranchisement if it were to become law. The Brennan Center for Justice and other groups estimated in a 2023 report that 9% of U.S. citizens of voting age, or 21.3 million people, do not have proof of their citizenship readily available. Almost half of Americans don’t have a U.S. passport.
In Kansas, a proof-of-citizenship requirement that passed in 2011 ended up blocking the voter registrations of more than 31,000 U.S. citizens in the state who were otherwise eligible to vote. The law was later declared unconstitutional by a federal court and hasn’t been enforced since 2018.
“Just to exercise their inalienable right as citizens of this country, Republicans would force Americans into a paperwork nightmare,” said Rep. Joe Morelle, a Democrat from New York. “This bill is really about disenfranchising Americans — not noncitizens, Americans.”
A further concern came up several times Thursday: Married women would need multiple documents to prove their citizenship if they have changed their name.
It was a complication that arose in town hall elections held last month in New Hampshire, which was enforcing a new state law requiring proof of citizenship to register. One woman, since divorced, told a local elections clerk that her first marriage was decades ago in Florida and that she no longer had the marriage certificate showing her name change. She was unable to register and vote for her town election.
“This legislation would immediately disenfranchise the 69 million women who have changed their names after marriage or divorce,” said Rep. Deborah Ross, a Democrat from North Carolina.
Rep. Laurel Lee, a Republican from Florida, said the bill “contemplates this exact situation” of married women whose names have changed, saying it “explicitly directs states to establish a process for them to register to vote.”
Morelle countered by saying, “Why not write it in the bill? Why are we making the potential for 50 different standards to be set? … How much paperwork do Republicans expect Americans to drown in?”
On a call with reporters Thursday, Vermont Secretary of State Sarah Copeland Hanzas, a Democrat, said she started trying to gather her own personal documents that would be required under the bill about 10 days ago. She doesn’t yet have them together despite having more time and know-how than many other people.
“It pushes women out of the democratic process,” she said of the documentation requirement. “And it’s not a coincidence. It’s part of a strategy to make voting harder, to sow distrust in our elections.”
Democrats also said the bill would disproportionately affect older people in assisted care facilities, military service members who wouldn’t be able to solely use their military IDs, people of color and working-class Americans who may not have the time or money to jump through bureaucratic hoops.
“The SAVE Act is everything our civil rights leaders fought against,” said Rep. Nikema Williams, a Democrat from Georgia.
Republicans have defended the legislation as necessary to restore public confidence in elections and say it allows states to adopt procedures to help voters comply. They have disputed Democratic characterizations of the bill.
Four Democrats voted in favor of the legislation: Reps. Ed Case of Hawaii, Henry Cuellar of Texas, Jared Golden of Maine and Marie Perez of Washington.
“The truth is, those who were registered to vote would still be able to vote under their current registration,” said Rep. Chip Roy, a Texas Republican who sponsored the bill. “We have mechanisms giving the state fairly significant deference to make determinations as to how to structure the situation where an individual does have a name change, which of course is often women.”
On Thursday, Roy said Cleta Mitchell, a key figure in Trump’s campaign to overturn the 2020 election results, “had a significant hand in what we’re doing here.” Mitchell, a longtime GOP lawyer, has played a central role in coordinating the movement to tighten voting laws across the country.
Trump lost the 2020 election to Democrat Joe Biden but has repeatedly made the bogus claim that it was stolen from him. There is no evidence to support Trump’s claim: Elections officials and his own attorney general rejected the notion, and his arguments have been roundly dismissed by the courts, including judges he appointed.
Adrian Fontes, a Democrat who serves as Arizona’s top state election official, described the voting proposal as a solution in search of a problem, given how rare noncitizen voting is.
“What it is doing is capitalizing on fear — fear built on a lie,” Fontes said. “And the lie is that a whole bunch of people who aren’t eligible are voting. That’s just not true.”
Cassidy reported from Atlanta, Fernando from Chicago. Associated Press writer Geoff Mulvihill in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, contributed to this report.
