Polixxy
← Back to bills

H.R. 22 · 119th Congress

SAVE Act

Rep. Roy, Chip [R-TX-21] (R-TX) · Introduced · 110 cosponsors

House VoteGovernment Operations and Politics
Progress
50%
1
Introduced
A bill is formally introduced by a lawmaker; it is assigned an ID and sent to committee.
2
Committee
A smaller group of lawmakers reviews, debates, and edits the bill before it can advance.
3
Reported
After committee work, the committee releases a report and the bill can go to the full chamber for a vote.
4
House Vote
The bill has passed the full House of Representatives.
5
Senate Vote
The bill has passed the full Senate.
6
Passed Congress
Both the House and Senate have passed the bill; it moves to the President for final approval.
7
Sent to President
The bill has been sent to the President, who may sign it, veto it, or let a ten-day clock decide.
8
Became Law
The bill is now law — by the President's signature, by the ten-day rule when the President declines to sign, or by a two-thirds veto override.

Latest action

Received in the Senate.

· from Congress.gov, as of August 8, 2026

Committees

Committee on House Administration

What this stage means

The bill has passed the full House of Representatives.

Why this matters

A majority vote by the full chamber is required for the bill to keep moving toward becoming law.

What can happen next

The bill goes to the Senate, which can pass it, amend it, or never take it up.

Study this bill

AP Gov
Unit 1 · Foundations of American DemocracyUnit 5 · Political Participation

The constitutional question

Under the Elections Clause, can Congress require documentary proof of citizenship to register for federal elections — effectively reversing Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council (2013), where the Court read the existing National Voter Registration Act to preempt exactly such a state requirement?

The strongest case for

Noncitizen voting is already illegal, but illegality without verification is an honor system: registrants merely check a box attesting citizenship. Requiring the same documents Americans already produce for a passport, a REAL ID, or a job aligns election administration with every other identity-checked civic function. The bill also directs states to accept a broad range of documents and creates processes for citizens with name changes. Even if fraud is rare, elections run on public confidence, and confidence is measurably low; a verification standard is a modest price for putting the citizenship question beyond dispute — and Congress unambiguously holds this power under the Elections Clause.

The strongest case against

The Brennan Center estimates over 21 million American citizens do not have a passport or birth certificate readily available — disproportionately rural, elderly, low-income, and married women whose documents don't match their current legal name. Documented noncitizen registration is vanishingly rare and already prosecuted, so the bill imposes a mass burden to solve a marginal problem. Requiring in-person documentary presentation would end the mail and online registration that tens of millions use. In practice it functions as a registration tax measured in time and paperwork, and the disenfranchisement risk lands on eligible voters — the constitutional harm elections law exists to prevent.

Foundational documents in play

  • U.S. Constitution

    Article I, Section 4 — the Elections Clause — gives Congress power to override state rules for federal elections, which is exactly what this bill does.

  • Federalist No. 39

    Madison's partly-national, partly-federal design is the live question: who owns voter registration, Washington or the states?

Organizations supporting

Organizations opposing

This has happened before

The For the People Act (H.R. 1, 117th Congress) — the mirror image. Democrats used the same Elections Clause theory to pass sweeping federal election standards through the House in 2021; it died to a Senate filibuster. The SAVE Act passed the House in 2025 and faces the same 60-vote wall. The Elections Clause is a loaded weapon both parties reach for; the filibuster has so far disarmed both.

Practice FRQ

Argument Essay. "Develop an argument about whether the federal government or the states should have primary authority over voter registration rules for federal elections." Use at least one piece of evidence from Federalist No. 39 or Brutus No. 1, and one additional foundational document or course concept. Respond to an opposing perspective.

Sources: www.congress.gov · www.congress.gov · www.brennancenter.org

Action history

Every recorded action from Congress.gov — 19 total.

  1. House

    Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 294. (consideration: CR H1569-1579)

  2. House

    Rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 18, S.J. Res. 28, H.R. 1526 and H.R. 22. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 22, H.R. 1526, S.J. Res. 18, and S.J. Res. 28 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of debate on each measure and one motion to recommit on H.R. 22 and H.R. 1526, and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28.

  3. House

    DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 22.

  4. House

    The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.

  5. House

    Ms. Johnson (TX) moved to recommit to the Committee on House Administration. (text: CR H1569)

  6. House

    The previous question on the motion to recommit was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.

  7. House

    POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 22, the Chair put the question on motion to recommit and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Ms. Johnson (TX) demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.

  8. House

    Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1580-1581)

  9. House

    On motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 211 - 215 (Roll no. 101).

  10. House

    Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 220 - 208 (Roll no. 102).

  11. House

    On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 220 - 208 (Roll no. 102). (text: CR H1569-1571)

  12. House

    Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

  13. Senate

    Received in the Senate.

  14. House

    Rule H. Res. 294 passed House.

  15. House

    Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 294 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 18, S.J. Res. 28, H.R. 1526 and H.R. 22. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 22, H.R. 1526, S.J. Res. 18, and S.J. Res. 28 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of debate on each measure and one motion to recommit on H.R. 22 and H.R. 1526, and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28.

  16. House

    Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 282 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 22, H.R. 1526, S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 22, H.R. 1526, S.J. Res. 18, and S.J. Res. 28 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of debate on each measure and one motion to recommit on H.R. 22 and H.R. 1526, and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28. The resolution also provides that H. Res. 23 and H. Res. 164 are laid on the table.

  17. House

    Introduced in House

  18. House

    Introduced in House

  19. House

    Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.