(UNITED STATES) — The U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 7296, the SAVE America Act, on February 11, 2026, sending the Trump-backed election bill to the Senate after a 218-213 vote.
The legislation would overhaul federal election administration in all 50 states by mandating new voter ID rules and proof-of-citizenship requirements for federal elections nationwide, shifting how states verify who can register and vote.
Senate consideration now stands as the immediate chokepoint. The bill still faces a 60-vote filibuster threshold in the Senate, making the chamber’s floor strategy and vote count central to whether the proposal advances.
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem defended the measure at a press conference in Scottsdale, Arizona, on February 13, 2026, arguing the federal government has a role alongside states in election administration. “Although the Constitution gives states the primary responsibility for running their elections, Congress also gives authorities and duties to the federal government. Now, as the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, those authorities lie within my department and the responsibility lies with me,” Noem said.
In a social media statement after the House vote, the White House framed the bill as a citizenship-only safeguard. “American citizens, and only American citizens, should decide American elections.” (Feb. 11, 2026)
Supporters describe the SAVE America Act as a national framework meant to standardize election checks in federal contests, while critics and some legal experts argue it risks clashing with the 10th Amendment’s protections for state authority over elections. The bill’s path forward depends on Senate action and, if enacted, on how federal and state agencies implement its verification workflows.
At the center of the proposal sits a documentary proof-of-citizenship, or DPOC, requirement tied to voter registration. The bill amends the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require documentary proof of citizenship at the time of registration, aiming to limit registrations to U.S. citizens through specified documents.
The measure also layers in a nationwide photo ID requirement for voting in federal elections. Under the bill, voters would need to present a physical, government-issued photo ID to cast a ballot in person or via mail, tightening rules around what identification qualifies for federal voting purposes.
H.R. 7296 explicitly prohibits digital IDs and student IDs. That prohibition would force voters who rely on those forms of identification to use other government-issued photo IDs if they want to vote in federal elections under the bill’s framework.
Beyond the polling place, the bill reaches into the administrative systems states use to maintain voter rolls. It mandates that states submit their voter rolls to the DHS SAVE (Systemic Alien Verification for Entitlements) database for regular citizenship verification and the removal of non-citizens, tying election administration to a federal verification system housed at DHS.
A match or mismatch in SAVE-style checks could shape whether a voter registration proceeds smoothly, particularly when state records do not align with federal data. The bill’s design pushes states toward recurring verification activity, not just one-time checks at registration.
Noem addressed criticisms that the changes could create friction for eligible voters, including those who changed names. “Critics assert that the ‘Save America Act’ will somehow hurt American voters—that’s just absurd and absolutely not true. There are many women out there, including myself, who’ve been married and changed our names when we re-registered to vote,” she said.
The measure also attempts to enforce compliance through penalties. It proposes criminal and civil penalties for election officials who register individuals without the required documentation, creating legal exposure for administrators who fail to follow the bill’s documentary and identification mandates.
Mail voting provisions form another major operational change. The bill severely curtails mail-in registration by requiring applicants to present proof of citizenship in person and providing a scanned copy of their ID when submitting a ballot, extending identity requirements into absentee processes and ballot return mechanics.
The bill’s supporters have pointed to federal policy steps taken before the House vote as part of a broader effort to increase verification access and coordination. The legislation follows a March 25, 2025, Executive Order titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections,” which directed the DHS Secretary to “ensure that State and local officials have, without the requirement of the payment of a fee, access to appropriate systems for verifying the citizenship or immigration status of individuals registering to vote.”
That executive action did not enact the SAVE America Act’s statutory requirements, but it established a policy backdrop focused on verification systems and state access. H.R. 7296 would write new rules into federal law, and its requirements would remain dependent on Senate passage and subsequent implementation steps.
The House vote also came after earlier legislative activity on election eligibility. The bill marks what the text describes as “a significant escalation of the original SAVE Act (H.R. 22)” passed in April 2025, reflecting a broader push to “nationalize” election standards for federal elections by setting uniform federal requirements.
House leaders passed H.R. 7296 as an amendment to a Senate-passed bill, S. 1383, in what backers described as a way to potentially bypass certain procedural hurdles. Even so, the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster threshold remains a central barrier, and a Senate vote would still test whether the proposal can attract support beyond a simple majority.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune has promised a floor vote, but the bill’s prospects remain uncertain due to opposition from Democrats and some moderate Republicans. Senate timing can shift quickly depending on whether leaders move it as a standalone measure or attempt to advance it through amendments and negotiations.
If the Senate takes up the bill, a floor vote would clarify whether the SAVE America Act can clear the filibuster threshold or whether it stalls despite House passage. Committee action could also shape the bill’s trajectory, depending on how leaders choose to sequence consideration.
For voters and election administrators, the practical effects described in the bill concentrate around documentation and record-matching. Naturalized citizens could face delays if database mismatches occur between state records and the federal SAVE database, raising the stakes for accurate records and consistent data across agencies.
Name changes present another pressure point. The bill’s reliance on documentary proof-of-citizenship and specified identity checks could require additional documentation when a voter’s records do not line up across documents, such as when a legal name differs from a birth certificate.
The bill’s broader impact on voters who have changed names has drawn attention in part because of the scale cited by critics. The text cites an estimate that 69 million American women and 4 million men have birth certificates that do not match their current legal names due to marriage or name changes, a mismatch that could require additional steps to satisfy proof-of-citizenship or identity checks.
Access challenges also factor into the debate over proof-of-citizenship and voter ID rules. Advocacy groups report that 21.3 million Americans lack immediate access to documentary proof of citizenship, and over 140 million do not have a current passport, figures that opponents cite as evidence of potential friction under strict DPOC requirements.
The bill also touches military and overseas voting, where timing and distance can complicate document handling. While a manager’s amendment sought to exempt overseas military voters from in-person registration requirements, critics argue the mail-in ID mandates will still create significant barriers, particularly when ballots must move quickly across long distances.
For states, the bill would tie core election workflows to federal verification systems and federal definitions of acceptable identification for federal contests, potentially requiring administrative updates, training, and new compliance procedures. The proposed penalties for election officials add further pressure to follow the law’s documentation steps precisely.
The SAVE America Act’s verification approach also elevates the role of DHS and its systems in election administration, including SAVE database interactions and related federal support services. DHS publishes election-related materials through its election security topic page, and USCIS posts updates through the USCIS newsroom, both of which could become reference points if the Senate advances the measure and agencies issue guidance.
Readers tracking the bill can review the text and status through Congress.gov at H.R.7296 – SAVE America Act, where Congress posts official versions and legislative actions. The March 25, 2025 executive order cited in the policy debate appears on the White House website at “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections”.
Even after House passage, the bill’s fate rests with the Senate’s procedural math and floor schedule, as lawmakers weigh how proof-of-citizenship rules, voter ID mandates, and DHS verification requirements would work in practice across state-run election systems.
Noem framed the administration’s view in constitutional and administrative terms, rejecting claims that the SAVE America Act would disenfranchise eligible voters. “Critics assert that the ‘Save America Act’ will somehow hurt American voters—that’s just absurd and absolutely not true,” she said.
