Sen. Mike Lee’s SAVE America Act is garnering national headlines and has become one of the biggest bargaining chips on Capitol Hill in recent weeks. The only problem: No one is sure when, or even if, it will get a final vote.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said Republicans are having a “very robust conversation” about how to proceed with the Safeguard American Voting Eligibility Act, Lee’s proposal to ban noncitizens from voting in federal elections and require photo identification to cast a ballot. Senate Republicans met behind closed doors to discuss the bill on Tuesday as well as procedural tactics the party could use to ensure its consideration.
“You ought to be able to prove that you’re a citizen of this country in order to be able to vote,” Thune said, noting he endorses the legislation. “How we get to that vote remains to be seen.”
The main obstacle standing in its way is simply mathematics.
What’s holding up progress in the Senate?
In order to get a vote on most pieces of legislation, the Senate must first agree to overcome a filibuster. Senate rules were updated in 1917 to do this by invoking cloture, which allows senators to vote on ending debate so long as they had significant support — which requires 60 votes under current rules.
Republicans only hold 53 seats in their slim Senate majority, meaning they would need at least seven Democrats to buck party lines to advance the measure. But Democratic senators are adamantly opposed.
“While the specific policies may have changed since the days of the Jim Crow South, the goal of the SAVE Act is the same: disenfranchising American citizens and making it harder for eligible people to vote, particularly low income Americans and people of color,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said on Monday.
Lee is exploring alternative ways to get around the filibuster, including a proposal to revive what is known as the talking filibuster — the original structure used by the Senate that requires senators to be present on the floor and actively speaking in order to stall a vote. Doing so would circumvent the 60-vote threshold, Lee argued, without needing to overhaul chamber procedure.
But there remains some skepticism among Senate Republicans, as several have said they oppose making changes to the decades-old filibuster requirement.
“There aren’t anywhere close to the votes — not even close — to nuking the filibuster,” Thune said. “That idea is something, although it continues to be put out there, is something that doesn’t have a future.”
Lee is still pushing for a change in strategy, previously telling the Deseret News utilizing the talking filibuster would not equate to “nuking” the filibuster altogether. However, the Utah senator acknowledged it’ll be an uphill battle.
“Nothing in the Senate’s an easy move. This one’s certainly not,” Lee said. “But if we want to do this, this is how we have to go about it.”
Meanwhile, at least one Senate Republican has already come out against the SAVE America Act: Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who said it would federalize elections, which is “something we (Republicans) have long opposed.”
“Imposing new federal requirements now, when states are deep into their preparations, would negatively impact election integrity by forcing election officials to scramble to adhere to new policies likely without the necessary resources,” Murkowski said in a statement. “Ensuring public trust in our elections is at the core of our democracy, but federal overreach is not how we achieve this.”
How would the SAVE America Act change elections?
The SAVE America Act would implement stricter restrictions to cast a ballot in federal elections by establishing proof-of-citizenship requirements.
While it’s already illegal for noncitizens to vote in elections and all voters must verify their citizenship, this legislation would go a step further to require voters to prove it. That would entail showing identification that is compliant with the most recent Real ID guidelines, a passport or some other citizenship document when registering to vote.
For any identification card that does not include birthplace or citizenship status, the voter must also provide a birth certificate, a naturalization certificate, an adoption decree, or some document that proves he or she was born in the United States. Voters must then also produce photo identification when they go to turn the ballot in.
Voter ID itself is popular across the country, including among Democratic voters. However, Democratic lawmakers have expressed concerns about the requirements to provide physical documents — particularly for those who do not have those readily available.
For example, only half of Americans were projected to have passports as of January 2026, and even fewer have access to their birth certificates. The latter is especially difficult for women who are recently married and have changed their last names, who would need to reregister, provide citizenship documents, and offer evidence as to why their name no longer matches their birth certificate, Democrats say.
Lee has pushed back against those criticisms, arguing the bill still contains language that would make it possible for those women to still cast a ballot.
“The SAVE America Act provides multiple ways to prove citizenship, as millions of Americans do every day for work, travel, and financial transactions,” Lee told the Deseret News. “It’s sad that congressional Democrats are so afraid of election security that they’re willing to spread falsehoods about commonsense safeguards supported by a majority of both Republicans and Democrats across the country.”
The House is expected to vote on the SAVE America Act on Wednesday evening, according to early schedules obtained by the Deseret News.