The push by House Republicans and the Trump administration to require voters to show proof of citizenship could imperil Native American votes.
SAVE Act would make voting harder for spouses who changed names
The SAVE Act aims to keep non-citizens from voting, but also could make it more difficult for married people to cast their vote.
WASHINGTON ‒ Senate Democrats and voting rights advocates are pushing to defeat a GOP election bill they said could disenfranchise Native American voters.
Republicans led passage of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE Act) in the House, but Democrats and advocates have slammed the bill, which among other things would require voters to show proof of citizenship in person for federal elections.
The requirement could be difficult for people in rural areas or on reservations because they sometimes have to travel hours to register in person, advocates said. Married women who took their husband’s name have also raised concerns about the requirement that the name on their birth certificate match their current identification.
The new bill, advocates said, is also expected to be particularly challenging for Native Americans who rely on tribal cards for identification ‒ which typically don’t include place of birth, as the new law requires.
“The SAVE Act is really a disastrous bill, and unfortunately it contains many poison pills,” said Jacqueline De León, senior staff attorney at the Native American Rights Fund. “As it’s currently designed, it would radically disenfranchise Native American voters across the country.”
Republicans argue the measure is necessary to protect the integrity of elections and to make sure only citizens vote.
“In order to preserve this republic, we must uphold what it means to be able to vote in a U.S. election,” Texas Rep. Chip Roy, the GOP sponsor of the bill, said in a statement.
The bill faces an uphill battle in the Senate where Democrats vow to fight it. Republicans in the Senate have a 53 to 47 majority so at least seven Democrats would have to join Republicans to pass the bill and overcome the chamber’s 60-vote threshold.
Barriers to voting
Advocates noted that noncitizens are already not allowed to vote in federal elections. There is no evidence that that is happening in significant numbers, according to the Migration Policy Institute.
Voting rights advocates said requirements in the SAVE Act would create more hurdles for people living in rural communities and on reservations who sometimes have to travel hundreds of miles to register in person.
“It’s sort of an amplified dynamic of the rural voter experience and challenges to have to present in person your citizenship documents to register vote,” said Sen. Alex Padilla, of California whose state he said is home to more federally recognized tribes than any other.
“If you live down the street from the county courthouse, that’s one thing,” he said. “But if you’re literally a couple of hours from the county seat with limited transportation options, it can pose a significant challenge.”
De León said long trips to registrar offices are particularly problematic in Alaska where many Native communities inhabit remote locations. Some require a plane to get to them, she said.
“The fact that Native Americans aren’t receiving fair access to register to county seats and to elections offices is in and of itself a problem,” De León said. “But then to require the administration to be placed at those offices means that Native Americans are now doubly disenfranchised.”
Among the identifications allowed under the bill are passports and tribal IDs that include the place of birth. But advocates argue many Native Americans don’t have a passport and can’t afford the $130 cost to get one.
De León said she doesn’t know of any tribal ID that includes the place of birth. “It’s sort of disingenuous to say that tribal IDs are accepted,” she said.
Eliza Sweren-Becker, senior counsel in the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, called it “a red herring,” saying most Native voters don’t have a tribal ID that would satisfy the bill requirements.
“The bill would harm all American voters,” she said. “It would especially burden voters of color and it would especially burden Native voters.”
Many Native American elders also lack birth certificates, De León said.
“The SAVE Act preys upon the structural deficiencies in Native American communities and makes it difficult and at times impossible for them to comply,” she said.
GOP wants citizenship proof
Roy praised the House for passing the Republican legislation by a vote of 220 to 208, “despite the ridiculous attacks and purposeful misinformation spread about the bill.”
Lawmakers voted April 10 mostly along party line with four Democrats supporting the bill. In addition to proof of citizenship, the bill also would require states to remove anyone identified as a noncitizen from voter rolls.
Supporters have argued that ID requirements have not stopped people from registering to vote. They point to Georgia where state election officials adopted sweeping election reforms, including requiring a photo ID to vote absentee by mail, after the 2020 election.
Voting rights advocates had said the state law could disenfranchise many voters of color.
“Turnout and registration numbers show that not only were these provisions not discriminatory, but they had record registration and turnout in Georgia,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation.
In March, President Donald Trump signed an executive order also calling for proof of citizenship in federal elections. The order was part of Trump’s continued false claim that he lost the 2020 presidential in part because of voter fraud. “This country is so sick because of the fake elections and the bad elections, and we’re going to straighten it out one way or the other,” Trump said before signing the order.
Advocates warn that Trump’s order and the SAVE Act will discourage voting, particularly among people of color.
“The executive order and the SAVE Act are really two sides of the same coin and again reflect this emerging threat that the federal government is getting into the voter suppression business, which is alarming and a dangerous sign for our democracy,” Sweren-Becker said.
Contributing: Riley Beggin, Trevor Hughes
Follow Deborah Berry on X at @dberrygannett and on Bluesky at @dberryjourno.bsky.social