Democracy Docket
By Jim Saksa
March 17, 2026
UNITED STATES - SEPTEMBER 10: Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, talks with guests during a "Only Citizens Vote Bus Tour" rally in Upper Senate Park to urge Congress to pass the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act on Wednesday, September 10, 2025. The SAVE Act would require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images)
The U.S. Senate will take up Tuesday the SAVE America Act, a measure described by election experts as “the most restrictive voting bill ever.”
Senate leaders have so far declined to sign on to a procedural maneuver — the “talking filibuster” — that supporters see as the bill’s only hope for getting around a guaranteed Democratic filibuster. That means the bill, which aims to solve the phantom problem of noncitizen voting, is likely doomed to fall far short of the 60-vote threshold it would need to make it to President Donald Trump’s desk.
Still, for those who care about the future of access to the ballot, the debate that the Senate will hold over the next week (or two) matters greatly — even if, as expected, the push to pass SAVE America crashes on the rocks of the filibuster. It will highlight the dangerous GOP extremism — the false claims about noncitizen voting, the conspiracy-driven thinking, and the contempt for American voters — behind the measure that Trump has said “supersedes everything else.”
It will give Democrats a chance to showcase a clear and unapologetic pro-democracy message. And, as crucial midterms approach, it has the potential to shape American voters’ views about the fairness and security of our elections — for better or worse.
What’s the SAVE America Act?
The SAVE America Act would require documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) — such as a U.S. passport or certified birth certificate — in order to register to vote. It would also impose strict photo ID requirements for voting in federal races and require states to conduct ongoing voter roll checks using federal immigration databases overseen by the Department of Homeland Security. Voters who mail in their ballots would also need to submit a photocopy of their ID.
The bill’s proponents claim it’s needed to keep noncitizens from voting. Even though noncitizen voting is illegal, and registration forms already require the applicant to attest to their eligibility, few states take proactive steps to prevent the practice.
But that’s in large part because it’s virtually nonexistent—numerous studies and voter roll audits have shown that vanishingly few noncitizens attempt to register, and fewer still try to vote. Those who do are often mistaken about their eligibility, like the Trump-supporting mayor of a small town in Kansas who thought legal permanent residents like him could vote. He now faces criminal charges, prison time and deportation.
Despite this, Trump has repeatedly claimed that Democrats rely on noncitizen votes to win elections, a falsehood that other Republicans, including House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), has echoed.
The SAVE America Act’s primary provisions would take effect immediately upon enactment, which has led to election officials warning it would lead to chaos ahead of the midterm elections.
The DPOC provisions are strict — a regular driver’s license wouldn’t work, and nearly half of Americans don’t have a passport. Moreover, many Americans would face difficulty getting their hands on a birth certificate — an estimated 9% of the population, or 21 million, would face significant hurdles.
And the bill would act like a tax on those voters motivated to get the proper documentation: A passport will set you back $165 and take 4-6 weeks, unless you expedite it for another $60 to get it in two weeks. Costs and processing times for birth certificates vary, but Massachusetts, for example, takes 7-10 business days and $54 to order online or over the phone.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) has argued that the bill won’t disenfranchise anyone who really wants to vote, noting that it directs each state to set up an alternative way of proving citizenship. How each state sets up that process — and even if they could before the midterms — is unclear. But it would presumably require already eligible voters to jump through lengthy bureaucratic hoops, which might discourage the less-than-motivated. And it would make it harder, if not impossible, for civic groups to conduct voter registration drives.
That might be the point. Republicans have been pushing for years to make it harder to vote in general, under the theory that the Democratic coalition relies on less-dedicated voters, like the youth.
So what’s happening in the Senate, and why?
An earlier version that only had the DPOC requirements, known as the SAVE Act, passed the House last year, but it languished in the Senate for months. Then, starting in January, a renewed push led by Trump and aided by billionaire Elon Musk, led to the expanded and more restrictive SAVE America Act passing the House in February.
Since then, the pressure campaign has shifted to the Senate, and on Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) in particular, to pass the bill. Thune, however, initially demurred given universal Democratic hostility and even some intraparty resistance — Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) are both opposed — to the legislation. Without 60 votes to clear a filibuster by invoking cloture to end debate, bringing up the SAVE America Act seemed like a waste of the Senate majority’s most precious commodity — time.
But Lee, who sponsored a version of the bill, has issued almost daily demands that Thune bring up the bill and force Democrats to maintain a “talking filibuster” to stop it. Under existing Senate norms, when a bill doesn’t have 60 votes to end debate, the majority usually tables it so they can move on with other business.
But, in theory, you don’t need to invoke cloture to end debate — at some point, under existing Senate rules, debate ends when everyone has had a chance to speak against the bill — and every motion and amendment offered during the debate — twice.
So, now, Thune plans to bring up the SAVE America Act with a motion to proceed on the House-passed version — a procedure that only requires 50 votes.
Usually, when the Senate brings a bill to the floor, they vote immediately to invoke cloture. The move not only limits debate, but prevents opponents from proposing amendments (which, under Senate rules, do not need to be related to the underlying bill).
But Thune won’t invoke cloture on the SAVE America Act, instead allowing for unlimited debate on the measure. Thune has presented this as a messaging exercise — forcing Democrats to go on the record in opposition to the legislation after a lengthy debate.
“I can’t guarantee an outcome on this legislation,” Thune said last week. “I can guarantee you that we are going to put Democrats on the record, but they will be forced to defend their outrageous positions on these issues.”
But some of the bill’s backers — like Cleta Mitchell, founder of the anti-voting group Election Integrity Network — believe that a concerted pressure campaign can keep Thune from ever invoking cloture. That would turn the SAVE America Act floor debate into a contest of will – but one that the bill’s opponents would enjoy considerable institutional advantages waging.
In addition to getting to speak against the bill, and almost any motion or amendment offered to it, twice per legislative day, for as long as they want, Democrats would be able to deploy many other delaying tactics. Under Senate rules, for example, amendments to a bill must be read aloud into the record before debate can begin. Normally, the Senate waves that rule by unanimous consent. But Democrats, seeking to block a determined GOP majority from enacting the SAVE America Act, could offer an amendment that would add the entirety of Infinite Jest — all 1,000 pages — to the voter registration forms, which the poor Senate clerks would then need to read, footnotes and all.
Democrats would be able eat up months of floor time, keeping Senate Republicans from confirming Trump appointees — including Sen. Markwayne Mullin’s (R-Okla.) nomination for secretary of homeland security — or passing other legislative priorities ahead of the midterms.
The last time the Senate tried to enact a bill over a coordinated talking filibuster was in 1964, when conservative Southern Democrats blocked a vote on the Civil Rights Act for 60 days. Eventually, the Senate invoked cloture to end debate and pass the landmark legislation.
At least one SAVE America Act backer is already opposed to this exercise: Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) told reporters he intends to vote against bringing up the bill, given how it’s doomed.
While Thune originally intended a few days of debate, conservative demands have lengthened the planned discussion. That’s given backers like Mitchell hope they can maintain the pressure campaign to keep Thune from giving up.
They argue the bill is popular, citing polls showing that around three-fourths of Americans support voter ID provisions. But other polls have shown that more Americans think ensuring that everyone who is eligible to vote can is more important than preventing ineligible voters from casting ballots.
But GOP leadership reportedly believes the bill’s backers will finally realize the futility of a talking filibuster after days of debate, which will feature Democrats railing against the GOP’s misplaced legislative priorities.
If the talking filibuster fails, that would leave Republicans with only one final option to pass the bill over unified Democratic opposition: amending Senate rules to remove the filibuster. The so-called nuclear option has even less support among Senate Republicans, who note that it would clear the way for a later Democratic majority to enact its legislative agenda without any concessions to the GOP.
What does Trump want added to the bill?
Trump has described the bill in existential terms, saying Republicans are doomed in the midterms without it. But if it does become law, the GOP would go 50 years without losing another election, Trump said.
But the president isn’t content with the current text of the proposal. In addition to the DPOC and voter ID requirements, he wants a ban on non-excuse mail-in ballots, prohibitions on trans athletes participating in women’s sports, and restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors.
To add those, Republicans will need to propose amendments to the Act and they would require 60 votes to be adopted. But it’s likely that those provisions would cost Republican votes, particularly new restrictions on mail-in voting.
Even if the Senate somehow managed to pass the SAVE America Act, the amended bill would be sent back to the House for another vote, where the chamber’s tight margins mean passage would be far from guaranteed.