If you’re following the news, you may have heard of the controversial SAVE America Act and seen how urgently it is being pushed as one of the most crucial legislative measures of this moment. Since its passage by the House on February 11th, the bill has moved to the Senate, where it began being debated on March 17th. By the time you read this article, the bill may have already been discarded, or it may still be in the news. But here’s what you need to know about this piece of legislation, and why it is so important that it does not pass.

The previously-named Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (now known as the SAVE America Act) was first reintroduced in the House Committee on January 30th of this year. As summarized by the Congressional Research Service, the bill would “require individuals to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote, and requires photo identification to vote [sic], in federal elections.” Meaning, a state is prohibited from processing and/or registering a resident to vote in a federal election unless said individual provides documentary proof of U.S. citizenship. Not only that, but photo identification would be required in order to cast a ballot.

Which documents would be considered acceptable?

• REAL ID (aka a driver’s license/identification that is compliant with the requirements of the REAL ID Act of 2005)

• A valid United States passport

• A military identification card, in addition to “a United States military record of service showing that the applicant’s place of birth was in the United States”

• A valid government-issued photo ID card that shows the applicant was born in the U.S.

• A valid government-issued photo ID card other than what has already been listed, but only if presented together with one or more of the following:

  • A certified birth certificate (must state applicant was born in the United States)

  • An extract from a U.S. hospital’s Record of Birth (must state applicant was born in the United States)

  • A final adoption decree (must state applicant was born in the United States)

  • A Consular Report of Birth Abroad

  • A Naturalization Certificate/Certificate of Citizenship

The bill is essentially being marketed as a way to remove fraudulent voting from non-citizens, aiming to expand restrictions in hopes of minimizing this risk. Moreover, the proponents and supporters of the bill are anxious to pass it ahead of the upcoming midterms. Some are going as far as enacting a filibuster to delay action; Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) even admits that “throughout history, [filibustering] has protected Republicans and conservative priorities and principles a lot more often than it has protected Democrats.” When defending the necessity for this legislation, Trump himself has stated numerous times that “our elections are crooked as hell.”

This is by no means the first time that there have been attempts to establish voter-ID laws at the federal level. The Trump Administration has been especially interested in pushing for a bill of this capacity for a while, likely due to Trump’s previous claims that the 2020 election was rigged against him, and that U.S. elections are disproportionately harmed by mail-in ballots and “illegal” non-citizen voting (non-citizens, however, have never been allowed to vote, and even reports commissioned by Trump to prove voter fraud have found little evidence of fraud or interference).

If passed, the provisions set by this proposed legislature would take effect immediately. This is concerning for a few reasons. First, it is unconstitutional at its core; the bill would indirectly implement a poll tax for any voters who may need to purchase proof of documentation in order to vote, which violates the premise of the Twenty-Fourth Amendment. Ratified in 1964, this amendment was enacted to erase economic barriers to voting, given that withholding this right from Americans was decided to be discriminatory and antithetical to the earlier Equal Protection Clause and the Voting Rights Act (guaranteeing the right to vote regardless of race) of 1965. For decades, these fees were especially popular during the Jim Crow era, one of the various methods meant to further disenfranchise primarily Black voters (and other economically disadvantaged communities) and suppress them from exercising their constitutional right to vote. Poll taxes are illegal in the United States—there is no reason that an American citizen should be given or denied the opportunity to vote based on their income, financial condition, or simply their ability (or inability) to pay to vote. And while may not be literally paying to submit a ballot, any documents that do not qualify as “acceptable” forms of verifying your identity will have to be updated or renewed, and these processes can be costly, inefficient, and lengthy.

Then, there’s the additional problem of accessibility, and who would ultimately be suppressed. According to the Campaign Legal Center (CLC), over 21 million Americans are unable to access additional documents that this legislation would force states to enforce/require. Additionally, the Bipartisan Policy Center conducted an analysis that found that an estimated 12% of registered voters lack access to the proposed acceptable forms of documentation. Millions of Americans do not have access to a paper copy of their birth certificate, let alone more specialized documentation such as a passport. The SAVE America Act would impact mail-in and online voter registration, systems that would need to be overhauled or otherwise suspended to accommodate the bill’s changes. There are additional concerns beyond just registration, though. The bill could lead to the enforcement of voter purges (which removes registered voters and runs the risk of barring Americans from their right to vote), expose personal sensitive information to agencies like the Department of Homeland Security (information they would otherwise not have access to, with no safeguards against using this data and violating citizens’ privacy), and even to the penalization and imprisonment of election workers if they help to register someone who does not have the correct documents.

Countless disadvantaged and marginalized communities would be affected by this legislation taking effect. As you can likely surmise, the bill would affect anyone who does not have supplementary forms of identification, such as a U.S. passport or a U.S. birth certificate, readily available—including first-time voters, voters of color, naturalized citizens, tribal and rural communities, and even survivors of natural disasters who may have lost access to these documents. But there is also a cost of entry, as obtaining or replacing these verification/identification documents typically comes with fees that many of us cannot afford. Even married women who have taken their spouse’s last name are not safe from the ramifications of this legislation, given that the bill requires these forms of identification to bear the same name—if you married someone and took their last name, it is more than likely that that surname does not match the one on your birth certificate, for instance. Consequently, you can see how this would be even more troublesome for transgender Americans who may have changed their name—the law would require them to have their deadname listed across documents, or to go through extensive hurdles to update their information and face further scrutiny (trans people are especially targeted, as Trump has tried to tack non-related transphobic measures onto the bill). The bill also complicates things for anyone with housing difficulties, or even with a history of moving, given that the Act “not only requires proof of citizenship, but also proof of residence in order to register”—meaning that, even if you have moved within a state and haven’t updated your information on your driver’s license or other eligible IDs, or cannot afford to right now, you could be thought of as a fraudulent voter.

Be wary of legislation that offers a clear-cut, seemingly obvious solution. Oftentimes, these bills may be concealing other intentions. Non-citizens and undocumented individuals are already prohibited from voting, so this piece of legislation is redundant at best, and potentially discriminatory against Americans’ right to vote regardless of class, race, or other protected characteristics at worst. The claims from its proponents that this bill is protecting voting integrity are misleading; if anything, millions of Americans are at risk of having to incur additional steps or losing voting access altogether. It is crucial to stay informed, and to scrutinize and research what you know little about—because when it comes to being cognizant of proposed laws like the SAVE America Act, your future and freedoms depend on it.