The SAVE Act would be the worst voting law Congress has ever passed. ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

[link removed]

The House of Representatives chamber has been the site of some of history’s greatest strides for the freedom to vote. It’s where Lyndon Johnson called for the Voting Rights Act. Where lawmakers voted to end the poll tax and advance constitutional amendments to grant the vote to women and 18-year-olds.

As I write, the House is currently barreling toward something very different: a bill to restrict the vote — to prevent millions of American citizens from casting ballots. If it becomes law it would be the most significant voter suppression bill ever passed by Congress.

The bill is called the SAVE Act. It would essentially require Americans to produce a passport or a birth certificate to register and vote. Brennan Center research shows that at least 21 million voters

[link removed]

lack ready access to those papers.

About half of all Americans don’t have a passport, for example. (Wait, how do they summer in France?) As for a birth certificate, many people may have one . . . but they don’t know where it is. (In a shoebox? At my mom’s house?)

It’s worse than that. Tens of millions of married women have changed their last names, so the names on their birth certificates don’t match their current legal names. One estimate

[link removed]

is that 8 in 10 women in opposite-sex marriages took their husband’s last name.

The bill has drawn the ire of election officials from both parties, because it would upend the way we register voters in all 50 states. Registration online or by mail? Not anymore. Voter registration drives would be functionally eliminated. Automatic registration at the DMV would be much harder.

In short, this would be the worst voting bill ever passed by Congress.

It echoes an executive order President Trump issued last week that purported to take over the election system in the United States by presidential edict. That executive order has little legal force — it’s flatly illegal in most of its particulars.

This morning, the Brennan Center sued

[link removed]

to block it, together with the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU-DC, Legal Defense Fund, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, and Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC, on behalf of the League of Women Voters and other groups.

Nowhere in U.S. law does it say that the president has the power to change the rules of elections. The Constitution empowers Congress and the states to make the rules. Congress has delegated some of its authority to the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) — crucially, created as an independent bipartisan entity, precisely to prevent meddling of this kind.

Trump’s executive order would essentially limit voter registration to only those who have a passport — it seems even a birth certificate may not be enough. It would also decertify almost all the voting machines used in the United States. Again, none of this has legal force, though, because the president lacks the power to order the independent EAC to do his bidding.

And, oh yes, the order would have states grant Elon Musk’s DOGE team access to the voter rolls. It would expose massive volumes of private information to Musk’s team without adequate safeguards. Expect DOGE staff to grandly announce findings of fraud, only proving that they do not actually understand much of what they are reviewing, just as they have with their error-ridden audits of government spending.

This is a mess: destructive, ill-considered, unnecessary. (Ask me how I really feel.) In congressional debate, we'll hear claims that the SAVE Act is needed for election integrity. That’s nonsense. States have many systems in place to ensure that only citizens vote. Claims of massive fraud are a myth, nothing more.

We'll also hear people say this is just a “voter ID” bill. More nonsense. Under the terms of this bill, producing an ordinary driver’s license wouldn’t be enough to register to vote. Just a document like a passport or birth certificate.

No, the reason Congress is even considering this misguided voter suppression bill is because Donald Trump demands it. It reflects his continued claim that the 2020 election was stolen. It taps unwarranted fears without doing anything to actually improve election security.

Lawmakers should stand firm. Senators should know: This bill is headed your way. Enough senators could easily kill it by refusing to allow it to come up for a vote. They should be ready to do so.

In 1965, Congress passed voting rights legislation after seeing footage of John Lewis being beaten in Selma, Alabama. Lawmakers responded with a commitment to justice. This time, Congress would act in service to a conspiracy theory. Tens of millions of American citizens would pay the price.

Watch a panel of Brennan Center voting experts discuss the executive order, the SAVE Act, and what we all must do to protect our elections.

[link removed]





Wisconsin’s Historic Supreme Court Contest

Today Wisconsinites go to the polls to vote for a new state supreme court justice in what has become the most expensive judicial race in American history. The election, which could flip the court’s ideological majority from liberal to conservative, has seen a staggering $90.1 million in spending, much of which came from out-of-state megadonors and national groups. Douglas Keith told The Guardian that this new world of big money–dominated state judicial elections “makes it so hard for the public to view courts as anything different than the other branches, and to have any reason to trust the decisions that come out of the courts.” Read more

[link removed]

Fortifying Elections Against Threats

Although at least 227 bomb threats targeted polling places, election offices, and tabulation centers on and after Election Day, the 2024 elections unfolded safely and smoothly thanks to advance coordination between election officials and law enforcement. “To keep our elections safe and secure in the future, law enforcement and election officials must continue to invest in and build on the joint election security efforts that proved successful in 2024,” Elizabeth Howard writes. Read more

[link removed]

Ongoing Fight over a 2024 State Judicial Race

Five months after the 2024 election, the losing candidate in the race for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court is still challenging the result. As the Brennan Center and Ballew Puryear argued in a friend-of-the-court

[link removed]

brief filed on behalf of overseas voters, Jefferson Griffin’s bid to invalidate thousands of votes would wrongly disenfranchise those who followed the rules for casting their ballots from abroad, among others. The case is currently pending before a state appeals court. If Griffin is successful, it would be a blow to democracy, encouraging future attempts to overturn election losses. Read more

[link removed]





Coming Up

VIRTUAL EVENT: The Risks of Government by AI

[link removed]

Wednesday, April 2, 3–4 p.m. ET



On the day President Trump took office, he revoked the Biden administration’s executive order that imposed guardrails on developing and using artificial intelligence technology. At a major AI summit that followed, Vice President JD Vance announced that the administration would “make every effort to encourage pro-growth AI policies,” and urged other governments to roll back “excessive regulation.” At the same time, Elon Musk and DOGE have pushed to automate critical agency functions, in service of an “AI-first” vision of governance.



Embedded within the controversies over these moves are concerns about the rapid introduction of AI across the federal government, from chatbots to automated defense systems. What are the risks to privacy and democratic governance? How can we trust this process given tech billionaires’ unprecedented role in the new administration? And what might come next? Join the Brennan Center for a discussion with a leading technology journalist, former government AI leaders, and Brennan Center experts. They will offer perspectives on how to make sense of what the administration is doing and how to hold them accountable to democratic norms and values. RSVP today

[link removed]

Want to keep up with Brennan Center Live events? Subscribe to the events newsletter.

[link removed]





News

Rachel Levinson-Waldman on social media use by U.S. immigration officials // ASSOCIATED PRESS

[link removed]

Eliza Sweren-Becker on the illegal executive order on voting and elections // MOTHER JONES

[link removed]

Katherine Yon Ebright on the president’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act // AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN

[link removed]

Feedback on this newsletter? Email us at [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]







[link removed]

Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law

120 Broadway, Suite 1750 New York, NY 10271

646-292-8310

tel:646-292-8310

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Support Brennan Center

[link removed]

View Online

[link removed]

Want to change how you receive these emails or unsubscribe? Click here

[link removed]

to update your preferences.

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]