The SAVE Act and Arizona Elections: What Would Change?

By Hayden Young.

Congress is currently considering the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, a proposal that would significantly change how Americans register to vote in federal elections. The bill passed in the House of Representatives and now awaits consideration in the Senate, where its passage remains uncertain.

If enacted, the SAVE Act would require individuals registering to vote in federal elections to provide documentary proof of their United States citizenship. While proponents frame the  proposal as a measure to ensure election integrity, critics argue that it could create substantial barriers for eligible voters. The SAVE Act’s effects are especially relevant to Arizona, where elections have been the subject of intense legal and political debate since the 2020 election. 

This post discusses the key provisions of the SAVE Act and considers how its passage could affect voter registration and election administration in Arizona.

What the SAVE Act Would Do

The SAVE Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1992 to require states to obtain documentary proof of U.S. citizenship before registering an individual to vote in federal elections. Acceptable documentation would include items such as a birth certificate, a U.S. passport, or other identification that complies with the REAL ID Act of 2005 that indicates U.S. citizenship.

Under the SAVE Act, states would be required to:

• Refuse to process voter registration that does not include documentary proof of U.S. citizenship.

• Create procedures for applicants who claim U.S. citizenship but lack immediate access to documentation.

• Create programs to identify and remove non-citizens from voter rolls.

• Impose potential penalties on election officials who register individuals without the required proof of citizenship.

Supporters of the SAVE Act argue that these provisions would strengthen election integrity by ensuring that only U.S. citizens participate in federal elections. Opponents argue that the legislation is unnecessary because federal law already prohibits non-citizens from voting, and instances of non-citizen voting are extremely rare.

Regardless of where one falls on the debate, the SAVE Act would substantially reshape the framework that governs voter registration.

Arizona’s Existing Approach to Citizenship Verification

Arizona is in a unique position in the national debate over proof of citizenship voting requirements. In 2004, Arizona voters approved Proposition 200, a ballot initiative that, among other things, required individuals to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote. In 2013, however, the United States Supreme Court in State of Arizona v. Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., struck down this requirement as applied to federal elections. The Court held that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 preempted states from using anything besides the federal voter registration form for federal elections. Because the federal form requires applicants only to attest to citizenship under penalty of perjury, states may not require documentary proof of citizenship for federal voter registration. This issue continues to be challenged today, most recently with the Ninth Circuit reaffirming that Arizona cannot impose additional registration requirements for federal elections.

As a result, Arizona now operates what is sometimes described as a dual registration system. Voters who provide documentary proof of citizenship may vote in both state and federal elections, while voters who register using the federal form without documentation may vote only in federal elections. The SAVE Act would eliminate that distinction by requiring documentary proof of citizenship for both federal and Arizona elections. 

Administrative Effects on Arizona Elections

If the SAVE Act were enacted, Arizona officials would likely face several administrative changes. First, the SAVE Act would require Arizona to verify proof of citizenship documents for all new federal voter registrations rather than relying on the existing federal form’s attestation system. Implementing this requirement would likely require updates to voter registration systems, new verification procedures, and additional training for election officials. 

Second, the SAVE Act would require states to take affirmative steps to identify and remove non-citizens from voter rolls. Arizona already conducts some citizenship verification through database checks and data sharing with other government entities, but a federal mandate could expand those efforts and increase the workload of county elections officials.

Third, the SAVE Act would create potential legal exposure for election officials who register individuals without the required documentation. Critics warn that the threat of legal exposure could make election administrators more cautious, potentially slowing voter registration processing.

Because election administration in Arizona is largely handled at the county level, these changes would heavily affect local election offices responsible for processing voter registrations.

Potential Effects on Arizona Voters

The SAVE Act could affect voters themselves, particularly those who do not have immediate access to citizenship documents. Many Americans do not keep documents such as birth certificates or passports readily available. Critics of the SAVE Act argue that requiring these materials could create obstacles for certain groups, including those who have changed their legal names, moved frequently, or lost access to the original records. Arizona could particularly face these challenges because the State has a relatively mobile population and a large community of younger voters and students who often rely on online or mail-in registration systems.

Additionally, some critics argue that stricter documentation requirements could limit certain forms of voter registration, such as online registration or voter registration drives. Civic organizations that focus on voter engagement in Arizona would need to adjust how they reach potential voters.

Legal and Political Implications

If enacted, the SAVE Act would likely face legal challenges. Voting rights advocates argue that strict proof of citizenship requirements could conflict with constitutional protections including the Fourteenth Amendment and Twenty-Fourth Amendment. They also argue such requirements could conflict with federal voting statutes including the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 if they disproportionately burden eligible voters.

Arizona could once again become a focal point for such litigation. Arizona has a storied history of election law disputes, including litigation over voter ID, ballot procedures, and redistricting. As a result, major federal election reforms will often face challenges in the courts.

The political stakes are also significant. Arizona is widely viewed as a competitive battleground state in federal elections, meaning that changes to voter registration rules could have national consequences. For example, in the 2020 presidential election the margin of votes between the candidates in Arizona was just over 10,000. Because Arizona awards 11 electoral votes, changes to voter registration rules—such as stricter documentation requirements—could influence voter turnout and potentially change the outcome of presidential elections.

Conclusion

The SAVE Act represents one of the most consequential—and contentious—federal election proposals currently debated in Congress. By requiring documentary proof of citizenship for federal voter registration, the SAVE Act would fundamentally change how states verify voter eligibility.

For Arizona, the impact could be particularly significant. Because Arizona already operates a proof of citizenship framework for state elections, the SAVE Act would effectively extend that model to federal elections nationwide. Doing so could simplify Arizona’s current dual registration system, but it would also impose new administrative burdens, create legal exposure for state officials, and reshape the state’s voter registration process.

Whether the SAVE Act ultimately becomes law remains uncertain. But the debate surrounding it highlights the broader question in election law: how to protect election integrity while preserving broad access to the ballot. For Arizona, a state that has repeatedly been at the center of election litigation, the outcome of that debate could have lasting implications on how elections are administered not just in Arizona, but across the country.