Republicans counter Democrat claims on SAVE Act voter ID legislation

Congressional Republicans are pushing back against Democrats’ claims that their landmark voter ID legislation would wreak havoc on the nation’s elections.

Congressional Democrats have criticized the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act as a tool of voter suppression – saying it is a bill that allows the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to monitor American voter information and create barriers to married women voting, among other demands.

In addition to requiring a photo ID to vote, the bill would require proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections, require states to actively verify and remove noncitizens from voter rolls, expand information sharing with federal agencies, including DHS, to verify citizenship, and create new criminal penalties for registering noncitizens to vote.

GOP WARNS DEMOCRATS BY USING DHS SHUTDOWN TO BLOCK SENATE VOTERS ID PUSH

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., right, called the SAVE America Act “Jim Crow 2.0” and warned that it would be a mechanism for widespread voter suppression. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo)

Trump has repeatedly emphasized voter ID, calling the voting reforms in the bill “NOT MISSING FOR THE MIDTERM RE-ELECTION AND BEYOND.”

Some of the bill’s most ardent supporters verified these claims in interviews with Fox News Digital.

“If you look at what he’s actually saying, rather than what Democrats are aggressively and, I believe, hypocritically supporting right now — they’re neglecting the requirements of the SAVE America Act — those requirements are actually very generous,” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, told Fox News Digital. “They’re really flexible.”

Here’s a closer look at some of the most common claims Democrats have made about the SAVE America Act — and how Republican supporters of the bill are reacting.

Claim: “Federalizing Voter Suppression”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has regularly criticized the SAVE America Act as “Jim Crow 2.0” — the Deep South’s segregationist laws largely removed by the Civil Rights Act.

“This has nothing to do with protecting our elections and everything to do with federalizing voter suppression,” Schumer said earlier in February on the Senate floor.

But Republicans argued that Democrats were “hypocritical” in their accusation of voter suppression, particularly when it comes to voter ID.

TOM EMMER EXPLAINS DEMOCRATS’ DOUBLE STANDARD ON BACKUP LAW: ‘THEY DEMAND PHOTO ID’ AT THEIR OWN DNC

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, speaks to reporters after a news conference on Capitol Hill October 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Andrew Harnik/Getty)

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., whose home state is one of 36 that asks or requires some form of photo identification before voting, argued that voter ID laws across the country had no effect on turnout.

“This idea that they’re saying this is going to suppress all voting — that’s never been done anywhere,” Scott told Fox News Digital. “They said that when Georgia passed it, and they had record turnout. So that’s not true at all. I mean, how many people do you know who don’t have ID?”

Claim: DHS will have access to legal voter data

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., argued in a news conference that this iteration of the SAVE Act — with its new name — is “worse” than the version passed by the House in April because it gives DHS access to U.S. voter data.

He appeared to be referring to a provision that would allow DHS to initiate possible deportation proceedings against a non-citizen on a state’s voter rolls.

“This version, as I understand it, would actually give DHS the authority to obtain voting records from states across the country,” Jeffries said earlier in February. “Why would these extremists think this is a good idea? That we Democrats are going to accept at this point? We would want DHS and ICE, who brutally, viciously and violently target ordinary Americans, to have more data on the American people? That’s outrageous.”

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, who shepherded both the SAVE Act and the SAVE America Act through the House, argued that Democrats were “really looking” for criticism.

“This allows states to be able to — as many of them wish to do — check their voter rolls against the citizenship database, something they are currently prohibited from doing under a judicial interpretation of federal law,” Roy said.

“So a long way of saying no, the SAVE system exists, we have citizenship data, and we’re just going to allow voter rolls to be checked against citizenship data.”

THUNE GUARANTEES VOTER ID BILL WILL HIT Senate Despite Schumer, Dems’ Opposition: ‘WE WILL HAVE A VOTE’

Senator Mike Lee, Republican of Utah and Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, during a confirmation hearing in Washington, DC, U.S., Thursday, January 16, 2025. (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Claim: Suppresses married women’s right to vote

Another oft-repeated argument by Democrats is that the legislation would make it harder for American women to vote, particularly married women whose last names are now different from those on their birth certificates.

Indeed, the bill would require proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate or real ID, to register to vote.

“Republicans aren’t really afraid of non-citizen voting, which we all know is already illegal and already grounds for deportation,” House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., said earlier this month. “They are afraid that women will vote.”

Rep. Emilia Sykes, D-Ohio, said at the same news conference: “If your current name does not exactly match the name on your birth certificate or citizenship papers, you may be barred from registering to vote, even if you are a lifelong naturalized citizen or born in the United States.

But Roy repeated that it was false.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“This is absolutely absurd, and we are specifically making a provision to ensure that no one can be left behind,” he said.

“If a woman tried to register to vote with different names on her birth certificate and driver’s license,” Roy said. “We literally have it written into law that all you have to do is sign an affidavit under penalty of perjury saying, ‘I am this person. This is my birth certificate…and this is my driver’s license that reflects my married name.'”