The latest battle between Democrats and Republicans revolves around the SAVE America Act, an initiative backed by President Donald Trump and recently approved by the House of Representatives. The bill, named the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, seeks to establish new federal standards for voter registration and voting in federal elections, focusing on proof of citizenship and stricter photo ID requirements. This comes ahead of the midterm elections in November.
What does the SAVE America Act propose?
The proposal would require citizens to present documents such as a passport or birth certificate to register to vote or update their registration. In addition, it would require them to show valid photo identification when casting their vote. Although federal law already stipulates that only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections, it does not currently require mandatory documentary proof of citizenship upon registration, which the SAVE America Act aims to change.
Republican momentum
Supporters of the bill, mainly Republican lawmakers, argue that the measure will strengthen electoral integrity and restore public confidence in the voting system. Senator Mike Lee, the main proponent in the Senate, has described the initiative as important legislation. Senator Susan Collins has stated that requiring identification at the polls is a “simple” reform that would improve electoral security. According to a Pew Research Center survey conducted last year, 83% of American adults support requiring photo ID to vote, including large percentages of both Republicans and Democrats.
President Trump — who has also made calls to “nationalize elections” — has repeatedly praised the bill and insisted that its passage would prevent election fraud such as the one he insists, without verified evidence, took place in the 2020 election he lost to Democrat Joe Biden. On his social media platform Truth Social, he reiterated his intention to push for the ID requirement for the upcoming midterm elections, even if he faces legislative resistance.
However, the legislation faces strong opposition from Democrats and civil rights organizations. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has compared the measure to Jim Crow laws — which imposed racial segregation in the U.S. — saying it could disenfranchise millions of citizens who do not have immediate access to the required documents. According to estimates cited by organizations such as the Brennan Center for Justice, around 21 million Americans do not have easy access to documentary proof of citizenship, and some 2.6 million lack any form of official photo identification.
Who could be affected?
One of the most controversial points is the potential impact on married women who have changed their last name. It is estimated that up to 69 million women could face additional obstacles if their birth certificates do not match their current legal names. Although proponents of the bill argue that safeguards exist — such as the possibility of signing an affidavit under penalty of perjury when there are documentary discrepancies — critics point out that marriage certificates are not explicitly listed among the documents accepted in some versions of the text.
Other groups that could be disproportionately affected include young voters, low-income individuals, naturalized citizens, rural voters, tribal communities, and transgender individuals whose documents do not match their current identity. Opponents argue that voting by non-citizens in federal elections is already illegal and extremely rare — with studies placing verified cases at around 0.04% — and the law could prevent eligible citizens from exercising their right due to bureaucratic barriers.
In addition to documentation requirements, different versions of the bill contemplate other measures. These include frequent purges of voter rolls, some every 30 days; the requirement that states share voter information with the Department of Homeland Security for verification through the SAVE program; stricter restrictions on what types of photo ID are acceptable — excluding, for example, some student IDs; and changes to mail-in voting, such as requiring individual applications to receive a ballot in states where they are currently sent universally.
Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have warned that expanding federal access to voter databases could put sensitive data at risk — information that in some states includes party affiliation, address, date of birth, and contact details. They also caution about the possibility of errors in voter‑roll purges that could improperly remove eligible voters.
The bill also establishes civil and criminal penalties for election officials who register voters without obtaining the required documentation, which critics say could create a climate of fear in the election administration. Previous experiences, such as a similar law in Kansas that was later overturned for violating the Constitution and the National Voter Registration Act after blocking more than 30,000 eligible citizens, have been cited as a warning.
Will it pass?
In the Senate, although Republicans have secured at least 50 votes and control 53 seats, the bill faces the obstacle of filibustering, which requires 60 votes to move forward. Majority Leader John Thune has promised a “robust” debate, but has acknowledged that there are not enough votes to eliminate the filibuster rule — a tactic to delay or block the passage of laws through lengthy speeches or other delaying maneuvers. Democrats have made it clear that they will use all available parliamentary tools to block the measure, especially because they believe the law could be used as a weapon to prevent their party from winning a significant victory in the next election.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition
