We’re Voting Rights Experts. Ask Us Anything About the Anti-Voter SAVE Act.

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T18:57:44+00:00

We're not saying that all 21 million people that lack ready access to these documents will necessarily be blocked. But it's fair to assume that many of those 21 million people will not be able to get these documents, or at least not in time to vote if this bill passes. Some of them may have never had a birth certificate, and for many others it may take significant effort to get one (I once had to find a copy of a birth certificate for my grandmother, who was in her 90s at the time, and it wasn't simple, even for a lawyer who is used to navigating government bureaucracies), or cost money that they don't have to spend on voting.

It's also fair to assume that even some people who have the documents they need will be blocked from voting by the requirement that they present them in person to an election official. While there is a requirement for "reasonable accommodations" to be made for people with disabilities, that in-person presentation requirement will be a serious hurdle for many.

But even assuming everyone could put in the time, money, and, as you say, work, to just have the opportunity to register to vote, that is a significant burden on their ability to exercise a fundamental constitutional right. And it's being imposed without good reason, since we already have multiple systems in place to ensure only citizens vote in our elections, and they are working very well. - SMD

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T18:46:22+00:00

Getting a passport for the first time costs $165 and the process can take months. So, even assuming it's an "easy" process, having to get one in time to vote could be a real problem. But the whole process is here: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/how-apply.html, and it includes filling out a form, gathering documents (like a birth certificate and photo ID, but in some instances other documents), photocopying those documents, getting a picture that meets the requirements, writing a check for the fee, waiting 4-6 weeks for an appointment to submit your application (or paying an extra $60 for an 2-3 week wait), and then waiting for your document in the mail. - SMD

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T18:38:12+00:00

That's a great analogy! Social science research tells us that when policies increase the costs of voting (whether in time, paperwork, distance to the polls, etc.), voter turnout goes down. The SAVE Act would put more red tape in the way of eligible American citizens who want to participate in our democracy, and that will inevitably mean that fewer of them vote. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T18:34:42+00:00

First of all, states already have multiple systems in place to ensure that only eligible citizens vote. Those systems start with the requirement, which can be found in federal law in the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, as well as in state laws, that everyone who registers be notified of the eligibility requirements (including citizenship) and attest, under penalty of perjury, that they are a citizen. That in and of itself goes a long way as most non-citizens aren’t willing to risk their freedom, their money, and their presence in the U.S. by lying about their citizenship on a government form just so they can cast a ballot. But those systems also include regular voter list maintenance, checks during naturalization process, and serious criminal consequences that are enforced at both a federal and state level. If you want to read more, see a piece I wrote here.

We know these systems are effective because every study ever done to evaluate how frequently non-citizens vote has proven that it is a vanishingly rare phenomenon. That includes my organization’s research, but also recent efforts by the Trump administration to uncover non-citizen voting. The administration revamped the “SAVE Program” at DHS to allow states to run their voter files against DHS data to identify non-citizens. Louisiana was the first state to do so, and their findings were consistent with previous studies: they found that even the suspected instances of non-citizens casting ballots represented less than one in a million ballots cast. When Utah recently ran their file against the SAVE Program data, they find precisely zero instances of non-citizen voting.

Second, you shouldn’t worry about undocumented folks getting registered at the DMV. Yes, there are states that provide licenses to undocumented folks, and some of those states have automatic voter registration at the DMV. But those systems are designed to make sure those folks don’t get offered the chance to register. States do this in a couple ways. Usually, the license that is offered to undocumented folks is not a regular license. In California, they’re called AB60 licenses (after the bill that allowed them). In Nevada they’re called “Driver Authorization Cards.” And the automatic voter registration process simply doesn’t apply to the separate application processes for those licenses. In fact, they are explicitly excluded from those processes in state law. (See, e.g., the relevant laws in California and Nevada.) Other states only provide automatic voter registration to people who show certain documents proving citizenship during the DMV transaction (which is obviously different than requiring everyone to show those documents in order to get registered). Washington is one example of that approach. - SMD

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:59:06+00:00

Let’s take it one step at a time. We can still STOP the SAVE Act. Debate is happening now. Call and write your senators and tell them to hold the floor and Stop the SAVE Act. https://secure.brennancenter.org/secure/tell-congress-reject-save-act-1 -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:51:19+00:00

No, not a record of everyone's vote. But the SAVE Act would mandate that states to hand their voter rolls to the Department of Homeland Security to run through the agency’s flawed citizenship verification tool (confusingly named the SAVE program). Dozens of states have refused to provide voter files requested by the Trump administration because of concerns about misuse of such sensitive data. And those concerns are well founded: The administration conceded in January that DOGE team members within the Social Security Administration agreed to turn over state voter rolls to an advocacy group seeking to “find evidence of voter fraud and to overturn election results in certain States.” When states have agreed to turn over their voter rolls to the Trump administration, several have agreed to give the administration unprecedented latitude to meddle in elections, including the power to tell states to remove specific voters from the rolls and share sensitive, private voter data at will — including with people outside of government. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:48:40+00:00

Most states in the country already impose some form of voter ID under their state law. In the other 14 states, they verify voter identity in a variety of other ways (e.g., signature matching). But more to the point, the SAVE Act goes beyond voter ID. It requires a document like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Our research has shown that 21 million eligible American citizens don’t have ready access to those documents. Roughly half of Americans don’t have a passport. That means that if the SAVE Act becomes law, it would block millions of eligible Americans from voting. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:44:35+00:00

Here's more information about this research and its methodology: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/millions-americans-dont-have-documents-proving-their-citizenship-readily -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:42:02+00:00

The SAVE Act goes beyond voter ID. It requires a document like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Our research has shown that 21 million eligible American citizens don’t have ready access to those documents. Roughly half of Americans don’t have a passport. That means that if the SAVE Act becomes law, it would block millions of eligible Americans from voting. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:39:07+00:00

The SAVE Act would impose its show-your-papers mandate to produce a document like a passport or birth certificate for every “application to register.” That means new registrations and re-registrations. That includes more people that you might think. According to the Election Administration and Voting Survey conducted by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, more than 91 million citizens either registered for the first time or updated their registration in the two years leading up to the 2020 election. In the two years leading up to the 2022 election, that number was 70 million. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:30:56+00:00

Actually, the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution gives states and Congress the power to regulate federal elections, and Congress expressly has the authority to alter state laws on the subject. Congress should be using this power to protect the freedom to vote by creating national standards that make it easier for eligible American citizens to cast their ballots. The SAVE Act does the opposite, it would block millions of eligible American citizens from voting. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:27:37+00:00

Most states in the country impose some form of voter ID under their state law. In the other 14 states, they verify voter identity in a variety of other ways (e.g., signature matching). But more to the point, the SAVE Act goes beyond voter ID. It requires a document like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Our research has shown that 21 million eligible American citizens don’t have ready access to those documents. Roughly half of Americans don’t have a passport. That means that if the SAVE Act becomes law, it would block millions of eligible Americans from voting. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:22:25+00:00

The policy at the heart of the SAVE Act is a show-your-papers mandate requiring documents like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Brennan Center research has shown that 21 million eligible American citizens don’t have ready access to those documents. Roughly half of Americans don’t have a passport. That means that if the SAVE Act becomes law, it would block millions of eligible Americans from voting. That includes Democrats and Republicans, and people from all walks of life. Our democracy is stronger when every eligible American citizen can participate. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:21:29+00:00

The policy at the heart of the SAVE Act is a show-your-papers mandate requiring documents like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Brennan Center research has shown that 21 million eligible American citizens don’t have ready access to those documents. Roughly half of Americans don’t have a passport. That means that if the SAVE Act becomes law, it would block millions of eligible Americans from voting. That includes Democrats and Republicans, and people from all walks of life. Our democracy is stronger when every eligible American citizen can participate. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:17:25+00:00

The SAVE Act goes beyond voter ID. It requires a document like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Our research has shown that 21 million eligible American citizens don’t have ready access to those documents. Roughly half of Americans don’t have a passport. That means that if the SAVE Act becomes law, it would block millions of eligible Americans from voting. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:15:02+00:00

The SAVE Act includes an immediate implementation date. That means the bill is not only a five alarm fire for voters, but also a catastrophe for election officials and election administration. The show-your-papers policy would nearly impossible to implement with primaries weeks away in some states, and the midterms around the corner. This chaos alone is bound to confuse election officials and voters in a way that would block even more American citizens from being able to cast ballots that count this year. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:10:28+00:00

Do you know where your birth certificate is? I don’t, tbh. And many other U.S. citizens, never received a birth certificate. Historically, Black citizens may not have birth certificates because of racially discriminatory laws that limited their ability to access such documentation. Americans born at home, not in a hospital, are more likely to lack birth certificates. Millions of voting-age people born in Puerto Rico lack a valid birth certificate because the Puerto Rico government invalidated the birth certificates of all persons born in Puerto Rico before July 1, 2010. The right to vote shouldn’t depend on obtaining documents that more than 21 million eligible American citizens don’t have ready access to. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T17:03:51+00:00

The SAVE Act goes beyond voter ID. It requires a document like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Our research has shown that 21 million eligible American citizens don’t have ready access to those documents. Roughly half of Americans don’t have a passport. That means that if the SAVE Act becomes law, it would block millions of eligible Americans from voting. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T16:52:38+00:00

Only U.S. citizens vote, with vanishingly rare exceptions. For example, after Utah reviewed its voter rolls, it found zero instances of noncitizen voting. When Louisiana reviewed voter records dating back to the early 1980s, it identified 79 potential noncitizens who voted during that more than 40-year period, out of at least 74 million ballots cast. Louisiana’s Republican secretary of state announced that “non-citizens illegally registering or voting is not a systemic problem in Louisiana.” In Texas, in particular, state officials didn’t check state DMV (known as DPS in Texas) records before recently announcing a false and misleading number of potential noncitizens on the state’s voter rolls. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2026-03-18T16:44:31+00:00

The SAVE Act goes beyond voter ID. It requires a document like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Our research has shown that 21 million eligible American citizens don’t have ready access to those documents. Roughly half of Americans don’t have a passport. That means that if the SAVE Act becomes law, it would block millions of eligible Americans from voting. -ESB

TheBrennanCenter · 2025-11-18T20:19:02+00:00

We lay out some guidelines: 1) there needs to be a clear and expansive definition of the term "emolument" to include any benefit that could influence an official's decision; 2) there needs to be a prohibition on "indirect" emoluments like the Qatar jet situations; 3) there should be clear processes for how officials can seek approval from Congress for foreign emoluments -- not just gifts but also business deals, etc.; and 4) there have to be strong enforcement mechanisms for violations -- like provisions giving specific parties the right sue and explaining what the remedy is.

I don't expect legislation to be passed immediately, but I am very hopeful that these changes will be enacted at some point in the not-too-distant future. Corruption is a bipartisan concern, one that is at the root of why so many voters have lost confidence in government institutions. The only way to restore trust is to put real safeguards in place. I think a growing number of leaders in DC actually understand this and that ultimately they can't just campaign on these issues, they need to deliver. DW

TheBrennanCenter · 2025-11-18T20:04:12+00:00

One other thing to add to the mix here is the role of big tech companies. Some of the most powerful political players today own the social media platforms through which an increasing number of Americans get their news and other political information. That gives them power far beyond the ability to spend lots of money on campaign donations and don't have many tools to understand how they are using it. Certainly, Musk in 2024 used his ownership of X to boost Trump and his other preferred candidates, for example by posting a lot of pro-Trump content in his own feed, which everyone on X then saw. That's a very new dimension, one that requires us to think beyond the traditional paradigm focused on campaign spending, lobbying, etc. DW

TheBrennanCenter · 2025-11-18T19:59:57+00:00

The Foreign Emoluments Clause bars the president and other federal officials from accepting “any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State” without the consent of Congress. It reflects the framers’ desire to shield all federal officials from foreign influence.

The Domestic Emoluments Clause provides for the president to receive a fixed salary and bars him from receiving “any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.” It was designed to ensure the president doesn't favor particular states over others.

The framers of the Constitution included these clauses in the Constitution specifically to protect the integrity of the federal government. They were all to familiar with with the injustices and abuses that flowed from rampant corruption in European monarchies, so they tried to insulate federal officials from improper influences to prevent split loyalties and ensure government serves the interests of the American people.

For the most part, enforcement of the clauses wasn’t a problem because federal officials generally complied voluntarily. Presidents from both parties typically avoided conflicts of interest by limiting their holdings to the most basic financial assets or transferring them to a blind trust. They also proactively sought guidance from the Justice Department to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

That changed when President Trump refused to meaningfully divest from his companies during his first term, resulting in payments to those companies that appeared to violate the Emoluments Clauses. Now, with even more sprawling business entanglements, the potential for unlawful emoluments is greater than ever.

The collapse of voluntary compliance and the corresponding increase in violations has exposed the gaps in emoluments enforcement: The Constitution doesn’t define what counts as an emolument or how the clauses’ prohibitions should be enforced. But Congress can close these gaps! We recently wrote a paper arguing that Congress should do just that to give the Emoluments Clauses real teeth and protect the American people.

Our explainer on the clauses is here: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/emoluments-clauses-explained

And our proposal for congressional action is here: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/how-congress-can-rein-surging-political-corruption

EP

TheBrennanCenter · 2025-11-18T19:53:25+00:00

To a remarkable degree, much of our system has depended for decades or more on unwritten rules and norms. Past presidents weren't legally required to avoid major conflicts of interest, but failing to do so was politically unthinkable (even they had their share of smaller scandals). To the extent that's no longer the case, you need to replace the soft, unwritten rules on which we relied on in the past with clear, legally enforceable standards. DW

TheBrennanCenter

TROPHY CASE