The SAVE Act passed the House on Feb. 11, 2026 by a vote of 218-213 and is now in the Senate awaiting a vote. Voting is expected to take place next week, according to Thune. If and when it passes the Senate, it will go to the president for a final signature.
Will SAVE Act Prevent Married Women from Registering to Vote?
Posted on February 28, 2025
Q: Is it true that under the SAVE Act married women will not be able to register to vote if their married name doesn’t match their birth certificate?
A: The proposed SAVE Act instructs states to establish a process for people whose legal name doesn’t match their birth certificate to provide additional documents. But voting rights advocates say that married women and others who have changed their names may face difficulty when registering because of the ambiguity in the bill over what documents may be accepted.
Does SAVE require documentary proof of citizenship to vote, or just to register? As I understand it, documentary proof of citizenship is the specific requirement that's hard for anyone who has had a change of name to meet short of a passport or an EDL in the 5 states that offer one.
Basically it changes the types of id that are accepted at voting booths.
When you vote you already have to have registered with appropriate ID to be counted federally. When you show up at the poll this act will change so that only federally issued ID types will be valid. Birth certificates are the most common but if your current name is different than what you were born with for any reason it won't count.
Of these federal id types most of them are opt in varieties and as such are actually more expensive types of specific ID like passports and "REAL ID". A regular old drivers licence as issued by your state won't be good enough anymore even though your name and listed address were verified by the state and already match the name on the voter registration.
Since these id types are more expensive it can make voting the preserve of those who can afford the time and extra money making it a way to disenfranchise economically disadvantaged voters of all stripes .
SAVE calls for "documentary proof of United States citizenship", which it defines in the act itself. A RealID that also verifies citizenship counts (normal RealID doesn't, and only 5 states that offer an "enhanced driver's license" do), so does a passport, a military ID combined with a record of service indicating you were born in the US, a federal, state, or tribal photo ID showing your place of birth was in the US or a federal, state or tribal photo ID combined with a birth or naturalization record.
Most people will fall in that last category. And most valid birth records explicitly require the record be of the same name. The big question I'm not sure of is if in all the small changes amended to the law by SAVE if documentary proof of United States Citizenship is required to vote or merely to register.
We are also just ignoring the fact that this is all blatantly unconstitutional. At least I'm pretty sure it is but IANAL but apparently knowing or caring about the law and our system of government is not a requirement for anyone in this admin so I feel equally qualified as the idiots voting for this shit.
I mean yeah, it's almost certainly unconstitutional under 24A. But theat requires a SCOTUs who cares about the law and the constitution instead of putting Heritage first, Trump second and all that other stuff a distant third.
No.
The states need to issue Real ID which is registered by using your birth certificate. For married women, they will also need to show their marriage licence.
The issue is the time that it takes for states to process Real ID and to re-issue marriage licences that have been lost.
The states I've lived in have entirely phased out non-REAL ID cards. You also can't fly without a REAL ID now. They're not some expensive alternate variety you have to opt-in to.
A lot of people still have driver's licences and ID cards that are not Real IDs, you don't need to get one to renew a licence.
I see. And two of the states that I lived in, they wouldn’t let me switch my ID without it being a Real ID. It wasn’t difficult or expensive… The requirements were basically the same as applying for a brand new license.
Ohio still has non-compliant ID cards. I've yet to need a REAL ID, I don't feel a pressing need to acquire the additional documentation I would need to get a compliant card.
You need one to board a commercial aircraft. That’s a decent reason for me
Proof of citizenship is already required to register, bringing proof to the voting booth is the extra hurdle this act brings.
You can change your name with the ~~IRS~~ SSA. That should be more than sufficient proof.
What does the IRS have to do with anything? Read the actual bill: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/22/text
Section 2(b) is the relevant bit regarding what counts as documentary proof of US citizenship.
The ~~IRS~~ SSA is a federal agency that you provide documentation to for a name change. Most places won't hire you without doing this.
The fact that you've changed your name and the corroborating documentation is already in the federal government's possession.
But that's not proof of citizenship, which is what the bill requires.
I realize now that I said IRS instead of SSA.
To change your name with the SSA you have to have an established proof of citizenship or immigration status, or provide the supporting documents.
Again, read SAVE instead of making assumptions based on practices of other agencies that are tangentially related.
That's still not proof of citizenship. The SSA is not in charge of tracking citizenship, so a document from them doesn't work for that purpose.
As you said yourself, non-citizens can get social security cards. Changing your name in that circumstance is hardly proof of citizenship.
You clearly didn't read my comment because the SSA knows your citizenship status. To make a name change that status has to be already known to the SSA, or you have to prove it.
And this is all ignoring the fact that you already had to prove it to get a Real ID.
And you're missing the point that other people are making: the SSA is not responsible for knowing your citizenship status, and so documents from them don't establish citizenship.
That they know it has nothing to do with anything. They're not an authoritative source, so they can't be used for that purpose.
You're thinking like it's an evidentiary chain. A requires B, therefore proof of A implies B.
It's not though: it's a list of valid documents from a list of valid sources.
And all that's moot because you can get an SSA name change or a real id without meeting the criteria to vote, so even if it was a proof A wouldn't imply B.
The SSA is responsible for knowing your citizenship status. It's something they have to verify before processing the name change.
If the SSA has applied your name change then the name change should be accepted by all federal agencies and you should be able to vote if your legal name doesn't match your birth certificate.
That's not them being authoritative for the information, that's them being a consumer of the information. There's a difference.
A store needs to see my drivers license to sell me alcohol. That doesn't mean that the receipt is proof I'm allowed to drive. If I get pulled over I can't give it to a cop to prove I have a license because the store isn't an authoritative source for that information, despite having an integration with the state I'd verification service.
This is just how paperwork works. You can search for this information yourself if you don't believe me. A social security name change is not proof of citizenship.