The SAVE Act May Be Stalled in Congress, But State Versions Are Being Advanced All Across the Country

Ever since President Donald Trump took office for his second term, his administration and its allies in Congress have been intent on passing the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act or its subsequent, more extreme version, the SAVE America Act. Both of these bills would require Americans to show proof of their citizenship—for the vast majority, through a valid passport or an original copy of their birth certificate—in person to an election official when they register to vote for the first time and every time they update their voter registration for address and name changes.

Acquiring the documentation necessary under the bill could be difficult for millions of eligible American citizens: A passport costs $165 to acquire for the first time, tens of millions of Americans do not have ready access to their birth certificate, and an addition 69 million women who have married do not have a birth certificate that matches their legal name. A military ID would not suffice on its own; neither would most Tribal IDs, and nearly all Americans could not use their REAL ID to prove their citizenship. In addition to this, showing documents in person would pose a challenge for millions of rural Americans. Some would need to spend hundreds of dollars flying to get to their election office; others would have to drive as much as seven or eight hours round trip—all while voter registration would be set back decades for all Americans, with an effective ban on registering to vote through an online or mail-in application.

Despite these facts, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the updated SAVE America Act in February 2026. The legislation has since stalled in the Senate, even after Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) led an effort to force its passage through extended floor debate. With support lacking among Senate Republicans to “nuke” the filibuster—lower the number of votes needed to pass legislation from a supermajority of 60 to a simple majority of 51—Republican leadership has now reportedly set its sights on trying to pass the SAVE Act through the budget reconciliation process.

This strategy has been supported by President Trump, who has continued to call the SAVE Act his “No. 1 priority” and repeatedly called on congressional Republicans to attach it to other “must-pass” legislation, such as housing legislation and, most recently, even the reauthorization of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which allows U.S. intelligence agencies to conduct targeted surveillance on foreign persons located outside of the United States. In his demands for Congress to pass the SAVE Act, President Trump recently even went so far as to order Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) to “immediately fire” the nonpartisan Senate parliamentarian in an effort to clear the way for Republicans to include the SAVE Act in larger pieces of moving legislation.

While the battle over the SAVE Act has been raging in Washington, D.C., for more than a year, conservative state lawmakers have been advancing and enacting bills similar to the SAVE Act across the country with far less public attention. Since the 2024 election, SAVE Act-like laws have been enacted in seven states, and elections for the 2026 midterms will likely be administered under proof-of-citizenship laws in six states.¹ Preventing the passage of the SAVE Act in Congress has been instrumental in ensuring that every eligible American citizen’s right to vote is protected, yet the threat of blocking citizens from the ballot box has grown substantially at the state level. MAGA legislators have made clear that if they cannot get the SAVE Act done in Washington D.C., they will get it done in state capitols across the country.

Prior to the 2024 election cycle, Arizona and Georgia were the only two states to regularly enforce a proof-of-citizenship requirement for voter registration in state and local elections. While sharing some similarities with the federal SAVE Act, both these states’ laws generally only require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship if their status cannot be verified using data from the state’s motor vehicle agency. If the SAVE Act passes, voter registration would still be upended in these states; but for the sake of simplicity, this report characterizes Arizona and Georgia’s documentary proof-of-citizenship laws as “SAVE Act-like laws.”

Since the 2024 election cycle, 12 states have passed SAVE Act-like laws. Seven states passed laws requiring documentary proof of citizenship from all those registering to vote, and five passed laws mandating citizenship verification checks that will result in some Americans having to prove their citizenship with documentation. Of the seven states that have passed laws requiring proof of citizenship from all voters, five—New Hampshire, Wyoming, South Dakota, Ohio, and Utah—will enforce these laws for the 2026 midterm elections, while two states, Florida and Louisiana, have not yet implemented their laws. In addition to these states, five more—Kansas, Mississippi, Kentucky, Indiana, and Tennessee—will require that some individuals whose eligibility to vote has been challenged through citizenship verification checks provide proof of their citizenship to prevent their registration from being canceled.

While the SAVE Act would change voter registration requirements for federal elections, in nearly all states, state-level SAVE Act-like laws cannot be enforced for federal elections. This is because of the 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, in which the court ruled that the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993 prohibits states from requiring more information than is necessary to register citizens to vote, such as documentary proof of citizenship. The only exceptions to this ruling are six states that were carved out of the NVRA, two of which—New Hampshire and Wyoming—have already implemented SAVE Act-like laws and will seemingly enforce them for both state and federal elections.²

The Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona ruling means that in 44 states, SAVE Act-like laws could only be enforced for state and local elections and election officials must keep two separate lists of registered voters: 1) a list of voters who have proven their citizenship and can vote in both state and federal elections; and 2) a second list of voters who have not proven their citizenship and can only vote in federal elections. Despite Supreme Court precedent, some states subject to the NVRA, such as Louisiana, have nonetheless signaled that they intend to enforce SAVE Act-like laws for both state and federal elections.

Previous elections administered under SAVE Act-like laws have shown how laws requiring citizens to produce documents proving their citizenship threaten to block tens of thousands of eligible American citizens from the ballot box. When Kansas adopted a SAVE Act-like law in 2011, nearly 32,000 eligible voters were blocked from registering to vote. Most recently, in low-turnout town elections administered under New Hampshire’s new SAVE Act-like law, hundreds of voters were blocked from casting a ballot. These cases show that the threat of SAVE Act-like laws blocking eligible American citizens from voting is not hypothetical; it is inevitable.

The Constitution and federal law already make clear that the right to vote in federal elections belongs exclusively to U.S. citizens. 18 U.S.C. § 611 makes it illegal for noncitizens to register to vote or cast a ballot in federal elections, with penalties including up to five years in prison. Additionally, every state requires voters to attest that they are U.S. citizens upon registering to vote under penalty of law.

The vast majority of state constitutions also have an affirmative statement that every citizen has the right to vote, without providing such a right to noncitizens. Presently, 31 states explicitly guarantee that every citizen has the right to vote, while 18 states have a negative right that only citizens have that right.³ No state permits noncitizens to vote in statewide elections, and many have already passed laws making it explicitly illegal for noncitizens to vote. More states are following suit to either make explicit that only citizens have the right to vote or explicitly ban noncitizens from voting. At least five states—Alaska, Arkansas, Kansas, South Dakota, and West Virginia— will have such measures on the ballot for the 2026 general election. However, these “only citizens vote” ballot measures are largely symbolic and would not require citizens to prove their status with documentation; therefore, they should not be conflated with SAVE Act-like laws, which would place immense burdens on many Americans, even potentially block them from voting, by requiring them to present documents such as a passport or birth certificate to exercise their right to vote.

In addition to legal protections at the federal and state levels, there are existing election integrity measures to ensure only eligible American citizens are registering to vote. Under the Help America Vote Act of 2002, federal law also requires those registering to vote to provide either their driver’s license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number so that election officials can verify their identity and their eligibility to vote—including their citizenship status. This process essentially serves as a “background check” for voter registration, but many SAVE Act-like laws would end this process, which requires trained election officials to put in the work to verify a person’s eligibility, and instead place the burden of proof on every single American citizen to convince their election official that they are a citizen.

The current identification requirements for voter registration greatly differ from the documentary proof-of-citizenship requirements in the SAVE Act. Only half of Americans possess a valid passport, which costs $165 to obtain, while Social Security cards and licenses are much more widely held and are either free or available at a more minor cost. Birth certificates are widely possessed, but under the current regime, a person does not need their physical Social Security card to register to vote; they simply need their Social Security number. This ensures that Americans who may have lost or do not have access to physical copies of these documents—such as college students or victims of domestic violence—can still easily register to vote.

Since the 2024 general election, seven states have passed SAVE Act-like laws requiring voters to present documentary proof of their citizenship. In general, there are four key areas where the federally proposed SAVE Act differs from similar laws in the states that make the federal proposal more stringent than those of the states:

• Frequency of proving citizenship with documents: The SAVE Act would require individuals registering to vote for the first time in a state and those updating their voter registration for name or address changes to present documents proving their citizenship each time. In contrast, many state SAVE Act laws require individuals to prove their citizenship status once and do not require them to provide documents for subsequent name or address updates.
• Requirement for physical documents versus copies: The SAVE Act would require individuals to present original and certified citizenship documents in person to an election official. Copies would not be allowed, effectively banning remote voter registration methods such as registering to vote online or by mailing in an application. Because of the specific requirement to present documents to an election official, it is also likely that registering at motor vehicle agencies would effectively be banned. In contrast, many state SAVE Act-like laws allow for copies of documents to be submitted, which would preserve online and mail-in voter registration methods.
• Use of Tribal IDs: The SAVE Act would not accept most Tribal IDs as proof of citizenship on their own. Tribal members would have to show additional documentation proving their citizenship, such as a birth certificate or valid passport. Many states that have passed SAVE Act-like laws allow for Tribal IDs to be presented on their own as proof of citizenship.
• Use of driver’s licenses, including REAL IDs, to prove citizenship: Under the SAVE Act, the vast majority of Americans would not be able to use their driving or nondriving license, including a REAL ID, to prove their citizenship. That is because standard REAL IDs do not indicate citizenship status, and the REAL ID licenses of citizens and noncitizens look indistinguishable. At the time the SAVE Act was introduced, only enhanced driver’s licenses (EDLs) likely would have worked as REAL IDs that prove citizenship. EDLs, offered by five states bordering Canada, are available only to citizens and essentially serve as passport cards for driving across the border. However, even in these states, EDLs are not the standard-issue REAL ID licenses. To get around this issue, some states that have passed SAVE Act-like laws have begun issuing licenses that indicate citizenship status. This means that individuals who have recently—generally, within the past year—received a license in these states would be able to use it as proof of citizenship for voter registration. However, as the issuance of citizenship-indicating licenses is new, the vast majority of people even in this limited number of states would still have to rely on a birth certificate or passport to prove their citizenship in the near future. It is worth noting that the federal SAVE Act specifically requires that a license indicate that someone is a citizen, but most states that have begun indicating citizenship status on licenses have added a noncitizen indicator rather than a positive citizenship indicator.

These differences mean that if the federal SAVE Act were to pass, even in states that have passed similar measures, voter registration requirements would still become stricter and more burdensome for voters.

New Hampshire

New Hampshire’s SAVE Act-like law went into effect on November 11, 2024, and was implemented in time for local elections in 2025. In May 2026, a federal judge struck down the new law and ordered the state to immediately stop enforcing it. The New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office indicated that it will appeal the decision.

The law requires a person registering to vote to present a birth certificate, passport, naturalization papers, or “any other reasonable documentation which indicates the applicant is a United States citizen.” Unlike the SAVE Act, New Hampshire’s law does not require voters who have already shown documentary proof of their citizenship to show it again when updating their registration information for address and name changes. As under the SAVE Act, documentation must be presented in person.

New Hampshire is one of six states exempt from the NVRA and will therefore likely enforce its SAVE Act-like law for both federal and state elections. Notably, despite the NVRA exception, which had been key in limiting proof-of-citizenship laws in other states, the federal judge who struck down New Hampshire’s SAVE Act-like law did so on the basis that it violated the First and 14th amendments, finding that it “constitutes an unjustifiable burden on the right to vote” and “violates voters’ rights to procedural due process.”

Wyoming

Wyoming’s law went into effect on July 1, 2025, and will be implemented for the first time during the 2026 midterm elections, with the state’s primary set for August. The law accepts a set of documents to prove citizenship similar to those required by the SAVE Act—including a passport, birth certificate, naturalization certificate, or consular report of birth abroad. Unlike the SAVE Act, Tribal IDs and driver’s licenses would also be valid on their own as long as they do not indicate that someone is a noncitizen. The use of driver’s licenses—REAL ID or standard—is feasible in Wyoming because the state recently began issuing new licenses that indicate whether someone is a noncitizen. However, to obtain a driver’s license as a U.S. citizen, individuals must present the same documents listed above.

Unlike the SAVE Act, Wyoming’s law allows those mailing in a voter registration application to submit a copy of their citizenship document, whereas the SAVE Act requires all individuals to show documents in person to an election official, effectively eliminating voter registration by mail. The SAVE Act’s requirement to present documents in person would be incredibly burdensome for many citizens living in rural communities, including those in Wyoming. Similar to the SAVE Act, Wyoming’s law would likely require voters to show proof of their citizenship more than once. Based on information from the Wyoming secretary of state’s office, voters who move to a different county or update their party affiliation must resubmit proof of their citizenship with their voter registration update; however, those moving within their county or updating their name or contact information do not need to resubmit proof of citizenship.

Wyoming is one of six states exempt from the NVRA and will therefore likely enforce its SAVE Act-like law for both federal and state elections.

Ohio

In a 2025 transportation bill, Ohio legislators slipped in a requirement to prove citizenship when people register to vote at the state’s motor vehicle agency, the Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV). The law went into effect on March 20, 2026, and states that individuals obtaining a driver’s license may only register to vote if they provide documentary proof of their citizenship at that time or if they have previously provided such documentation. The bill does not set forth acceptable documents to prove citizenship, but guidance from the Ohio secretary of state’s office suggests that acceptable documents include a valid license that does not indicate someone is a noncitizen, a birth certificate, a valid passport, or a naturalization certificate. Notably, Ohio recently began issuing driver’s licenses that indicate whether someone is a noncitizen.

Ohio is subject to the NVRA, meaning it should only be able to enforce its SAVE Act-like law for voting in state and local elections.

South Dakota

In 2026, South Dakota passed a series of SAVE Act-like laws that have gone into effect. The first law requires those registering to vote for the first time to provide documentary proof of their citizenship. To do this, they may use a driver’s license issued after July 1, 2025, that indicates citizenship status; Tribal IDs; or a copy of their birth certificate, valid passport, consular report of birth abroad, or naturalization papers.

Unlike the federal SAVE Act, individuals are allowed to submit copies of their documents, meaning that South Dakota voters will still be able to register to vote by mailing in an application. In another departure from the federal SAVE Act, Tribal IDs will be acceptable proof of citizenship on their own, and those submitting voter registration updates for address or name changes will not need to reverify their citizenship status.

A second law expands the public’s ability to challenge an individual’s right to vote on the basis of citizenship. This effectively means that one South Dakotan can accuse another of not being a U.S. citizen and petition to have that person’s voter registration canceled. Additionally, a proposed South Dakota constitutional ballot initiative would prohibit noncitizens from voting in any election, even though state law already prohibits them from doing so.

South Dakota is subject to the NVRA, meaning it should only be able to enforce its SAVE Act-like law for voting in state and local elections.

Utah

Utah’s new SAVE Act-like law will be in effect for the November 2026 general election. The law requires proof of citizenship for all new registrants and for registered voters who did not previously provide information during registration that could be used to verify their citizenship status. As of May 2026, at least 5,000 registered voters have been identified in that latter group, many of whom are elderly voters who registered to vote decades ago, prior to a federal requirement to provide either a driver’s license number or Social Security number during voter registration for citizenship verification.

Unlike the federal SAVE Act, copies of documents are permissible under Utah’s new law, meaning that individuals will be able to continue registering to vote by submitting an application online or by mail. The new law also mandates the use of the U.S. Department of Homeland (DHS) Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database—which is discussed in greater detail below. If an individual is flagged by the database or other data as a “potential noncitizen,” they will have 30 days to provide documentary proof of their citizenship or be removed as a registered voter.

Utah is subject to the NVRA and will only enforce its SAVE Act-like law for state and local elections.

Louisiana

Louisiana’s SAVE Act-like law went into effect on January 1, 2025, but has not yet been implemented. The new law is vague and generally prohibits noncitizens from registering to vote in elections, which is already prohibited under federal law, and requires proof of citizenship with each voter registration application. However, the law does not list which documents will work as proof of citizenship. In all likelihood, U.S. passports, birth certificates, consular reports of birth abroad, and naturalization certificates will be forms of documentation that can serve as proof of citizenship.

Like the SAVE Act, it appears Louisiana’s law will require proof of citizenship when registering to vote for the first time and for subsequent updates for address and name changes. Based on the wording of the legislation, it is likely that digital forms or copies of documents will be acceptable under the new law, which would allow for voter registration by mail or online. This differs from the SAVE Act, which would require all documents to be shown in person to an election official, effectively eliminating online or mail voter registration.

Officials have been signaling that they intend to enforce Louisiana’s law for both state and federal elections, disregarding Supreme Court precedent. Louisiana’s attorney general even filed a lawsuit in April 2026 against the U.S. Election Assistance Commission over the commission’s decision to deny Louisiana its request to update the federal voter registration form to require proof of citizenship for federal elections.

Florida

In April 2026, Florida enacted its own SAVE Act-like law that will be enforced beginning on January 1, 2027. The law requires all individuals who have not previously provided proof of their citizenship to Florida’s motor vehicle agency to provide documentary proof when registering to vote for the first time or updating their voter registration for address or name changes. The law will predominantly affect young citizens registering to vote for the first time, registered voters who have not yet applied for a REAL ID, and naturalized citizens who received a REAL ID prior to obtaining citizenship.

Individuals whose citizenship status cannot be verified through the state’s motor vehicle agency will have 30 days from receiving notification to prove their citizenship using a certified copy of their birth certificate, a valid passport, a driver’s license or other ID card that indicates citizenship, or a naturalization certificate. The law simultaneously requires Florida ID cards, including driver’s licenses issued after January 1, 2027, to indicate whether someone is a citizen.

Similar to the SAVE Act, the Florida law seemingly does not allow for digital copies of documents to be submitted, meaning that citizens will need to show documents in person.

In addition to requiring documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration, Florida’s law will no longer allow the use of student, retirement center, and public assistance IDs as voter IDs at the polls.

Florida is subject to the NVRA and could only enforce its SAVE Act-like law for voting in state and local elections. Despite this, there is no explicit language in the new law stating that it will not apply to federal elections.

In addition to requiring documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration, five states have passed laws mandating citizenship verification checks, including through the use of the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements database.

However, DHS’ SAVE database is distinct from the SAVE Act: The newest and more extreme version of the SAVE Act would also mandate that states hand over their voter rolls to the federal government for screening using DHS’ SAVE database. In practice, this would mean that a federal agency would screen a list of registered voters maintained by a state against individuals identified in the SAVE database as citizens to find matches. While about a dozen states have already voluntarily handed over their list of registered voters to the DHS, others have refused, citing concerns of federal interference in elections as well as data privacy violations. The Trump administration has tried to legally force more than 30 states to hand over their voter rolls and even tried to strong-arm Minnesota into handing over its voter rolls in exchange for lifting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)’s siege of the state.

While this battle between the federal government and many states has been ongoing, Kansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Indiana have passed laws mandating citizenship verification checks, including through the use of the SAVE database. These checks will require those flagged as potential noncitizens to present documentary proof of their citizenship in order to prevent the cancellation of their voter registration.

It is important to consider these new citizenship verification laws when analyzing the landscape of SAVE Act-like laws both because of the updated SAVE Act’s provision mandating citizenship verification checks using the DHS’ SAVE database and because these state laws will result in Americans needing to prove their citizenship with documentation. Election officials have long used federal and state databases to verify the citizenship of those trying to register to vote, but the use of the DHS’ revamped SAVE system has raised serious concerns both because of its inaccuracy in flagging citizens for removal and because of data privacy violations.

On the first front, reporting has shown that in states where officials have voluntarily used the SAVE database, such as Texas and Missouri, the database has erroneously flagged hundreds—potentially thousands—of U.S. citizens as “noncitizens” and, in particular, erroneously flagged naturalized citizens. In Texas, among those flagged by the SAVE system as “noncitizens” were citizens who had already provided proof of their citizenship to the Texas Department of Public Safety during driver’s license transactions, exemplifying just how unreliable and error-ridden the DHS’ SAVE database is. In Missouri, election officials were even instructed to ban flagged voters from casting ballots, though hundreds of those flagged turned out to be citizens. In fact, in one Missouri county, half of those initially flagged as noncitizens have already been confirmed as citizens.

On the data privacy front, legal experts have claimed that the DHS’ revamping of the SAVE database—particularly its consolidation of data from the Social Security Administration—likely violated the Data Privacy Act of 1974 and the Constitution. To make matters worse, citizenship data from the Social Security Administration are often outdated for naturalized citizens because the agency predominantly relies on individuals reporting their citizenship changes in person. The resulting lags between changes in citizenship status and their reflection in the Social Security database are also a likely reason that the SAVE system disproportionately erroneously flags naturalized citizens.

Kansas

In April 2026, Kansas enacted a law that requires biannual voter citizenship verification checks against the DHS’ SAVE database. This law means that Kansas will submit its list of registered voters to the DHS, which will screen the list to identify potential noncitizens. Individuals identified as noncitizens through this screening must be notified of their placement on the challenge list and must provide verification of their citizenship status before being confirmed as eligible to vote. The law does not identify the means of verification or time limit before identified individuals are purged from the rolls. In all likelihood, citizens will likely be able to use U.S. passports, birth certificates, consular reports of birth abroad, and naturalization certificates as documentation to prove citizenship under the state law.

Mississippi

In early 2026, Mississippi enacted a law that will go into effect on July 1, 2026, requiring election officials to conduct annual citizenship verification checks against the DHS’ SAVE database. If the SAVE database flags a person as potentially not being a U.S. citizen, they must prove their citizenship status with a birth certificate, a valid passport, or naturalization papers; photocopies are permissible. If a person fails to prove their citizenship status within 30-days of receiving notice, they will be removed as a registered voter and labeled as “pending”—a status that allows them to cast only a provisional ballot that will be counted if the person provides documentary proof of their citizenship within five days of casting the ballot.

Kentucky

In April 2026, the Kentucky legislature overrode Gov. Andy Beshear’s (D) veto to enact a new law that 1) authorizes election officials to hand over their list of registered voters to the DHS for voter citizenship verification checks; and 2) requires documentary proof of citizenship from individuals flagged as potential “noncitizens.” These individuals must then present either a passport, birth certificate, consular report of birth abroad, or certificate of naturalization at their county clerk’s office. Those flagged as potential noncitizens will only be allowed to cast a provisional ballot in the next election and will have their voter registration canceled if they fail to provide documentary proof of their citizenship prior to the second general election that occurs after they have been flagged.

Tennessee

In 2025, Tennessee enacted a law that requires the secretary of state’s office to create a citizenship verification system for voter registration by January 2028. Local election officials will use the system to check an applicant’s citizenship status prior to adding them as a registered voter and reject their application if their citizenship status cannot be verified. A person whose application is rejected can appeal the decision within 10 days, though that process and what is required to prove eligibility is vague under existing state law. In April 2026, Tennessee amended this law to explicitly direct election officials to use the DHS’ SAVE database during verification checks.

In addition to these new laws, Tennessee has had a law on the books since 2011 requiring election officials to use state and federal databases to verify the citizenship of registered voters. If an individual is notified that they have been flagged as potentially not being a citizen, they have 30 days from receiving notice to provide documentary proof of their citizenship. To do this, they may use an original or photocopy of their birth certificate, passport, or naturalization certificate.

Indiana

In the past two years, Indiana has enacted a series of citizenship verification laws that will predominantly affect naturalized citizens’ right to vote but are not explicitly tied to the DHS’ SAVE database. One law requires that election officials compare voter rolls with the state’s motor vehicle agency and identify anyone who registered to vote with a temporary ID, including a temporary driver’s license, as a potential noncitizen. Those flagged as potential noncitizens have 30 days to provide proof of their citizenship. Another law similarly requires those newly registering to vote with a temporary ID to be flagged and notified that they must provide proof of citizenship. To speed up enforcement of these laws, Indiana legislators passed an additional law mandating that individuals who fail to respond to the notice within 30 days have their registration canceled within 48 hours.

Since the 2024 election cycle, SAVE Act-like legislation has been introduced in many state legislatures, with some of these directly described by their sponsors as the states’ version of the SAVE Act. While many legislatures have adjourned for the 2026 legislative cycle, the below SAVE Act-like bills were advanced, meaning they were either reported out of committee or passed by one chamber of the state legislature. These bills could continue to advance or be reintroduced in subsequent legislative sessions. Therefore, the states listed below reflect where SAVE Act-like laws are most likely to be enacted in the near future.

Missouri

The Missouri Senate advanced legislation that, if enacted, would require proof of citizenship to register to vote; a birth certificate, valid passport, naturalization certificate, or Tribal ID card would suffice. Unlike the federal SAVE Act, copies of these documents would be acceptable, and Tribal IDs would suffice on their own. The law also would permit digital copies of documents, which means that Missouri citizens could continue using online and mail-in voter registration. Moreover, unlike the federal SAVE Act, the legislation would apply only to new voters, and those making registration updates would not need to provide proof of their citizenship. In addition to new voters, anyone removed from the voter roll list during voter roll maintenance procedures or flagged by the DHS’ SAVE system would also need to provide proof of their citizenship to reinstate themselves as a registered voter.

Missouri is subject to the NVRA and could only enforce its SAVE Act-like law for voting in state and local elections.

Iowa

In early 2026, the Iowa Senate passed legislation that would require the state registrar of voters to verify the citizenship of all registered voters annually and conduct a monthly check of new voters against the DHS’ SAVE database. If a person received notice they have been flagged, they would have to provide proof of their citizenship within 90 days; otherwise, their voter registration would be canceled. The bill does not identify the means by which citizenship needs to be proven, but it directs county officials to provide that information.

Michigan

In spring 2026, the Michigan House passed legislation that would require election officials to use the DHS’ SAVE database to verify citizenship and require all those whose citizenship cannot be verified using federal or state data to provide documentary proof of their citizenship. Individuals could use a passport, birth certificate, driver’s license that indicates the individual has proven their citizenship, Tribal ID, naturalization certificate, or consular report of birth abroad to prove their citizenship.

Unlike the federal SAVE Act, this legislation would not affect every single person registering to vote or making a voter registration update; it would predominantly affect those whose citizenship cannot be verified through federal and state data. Additionally, the legislation allows individuals to submit a copy of their documentation, meaning that unlike the federal SAVE Act, they would not be required to show documents in person and remote voter registration systems could continue to function.

At the same time that many MAGA state legislators have passed or advanced SAVE Act-like laws, proponents of the federal SAVE Act have mobilized to enact its policies by putting them directly before voters in the form of citizen-initiated ballot measures. For the 2026 general election, it is likely that a SAVE Act-like ballot measure will appear before voters in only one state.

Voters in five additional states—Alaska, Arkansas, Kansas, South Dakota, and West Virginia—will cast their ballot for “only citizens vote” ballot measures, which aim to either make explicit that only citizens have the right to vote or explicitly ban noncitizens from voting. However, these “only citizens vote” ballot measures are largely symbolic and should not be conflated with SAVE Act-like ballot measures, which would require Americans to prove their citizenship through documentation and/or subject them to citizenship verification checks.

Michigan

Although the Michigan Constitution already provides that citizens have the right to vote in elections, there is a proposed ballot initiative for the 2026 general election that would amend the state’s constitution to 1) state that only citizens have the right to vote; and 2) require the secretary of state to establish a statewide citizenship verification program.

Under the verification program, the secretary of state’s office would be required to verify the citizenship status of every registered voter on an ongoing basis using federal and state data. If the citizenship status of a person cannot be verified, the person would have 45 days from receiving notice to prove their citizenship status. To do this, they could provide a Real ID or other state or Tribal-issued ID that indicates their citizenship status; in Michigan, an EDL would satisfy this requirement. They could also provide a valid passport, birth certificate, military ID with a record of service indicating place of birth, or naturalization certificate.

Sponsors of the ballot initiative have turned in 750,000 signatures ahead of the ballot initiative filing deadline, far surpassing the number of signatures required to place an initiative on the ballot. This is a likely indication that the initiative will be on the ballot for the 2026 general election.

Even as the federal SAVE Act has stalled in Congress, seven states have enacted SAVE Act-like laws that advance MAGA extremists’ agenda to add red tape to how citizens can register to vote in elections. These laws make it more difficult for Americans to make their voices heard at the ballot box. More laws such as these are advancing through state legislatures, all while states have adopted laws mandating the use of the DHS’ SAVE system or even voluntarily handed over their voter rolls, resulting in even more American citizens having to prove their citizenship to cast their vote.

While SAVE Act-like laws differ state to state, their commonality is that they attempt to make illegal something that is already illegal in every state and under federal law: noncitizen voting in state and federal elections. Critically, these laws have the potential to put significant burdens on individual Americans to prove their citizenship with documents that they may not have or may be difficult and costly to obtain. Furthermore, these new laws will subject citizens to governmental database errors that could result in the cancellation of their voter registration and inability to cast a ballot.

State lawmakers are not just experimenting with these laws; the real-world impacts have been felt in states such as Kansas and New Hampshire. Those laws had no measurable impact on voter fraud, but they have denied tens of thousands of eligible American citizens the right to vote. That is the same impact legislators across the county are aiming to deliver by implementing and advancing SAVE Act-like laws. In full, despite the federal SAVE Act stalling in Congress, SAVE Act-like laws sweeping the nation threaten to silence the voices of millions of Americans across the country at the state and local level and, in some cases, also at the federal level. President Trump’s increasingly forceful demands to pass the SAVE Act may not have moved Washington lawmakers just yet, but state lawmakers have nonetheless advanced his agenda in capitols across the country.