In a bold stand against a proposed federal election bill, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield joins forces with 17 other attorneys general to oppose the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which they argue threatens to disenfranchise millions of eligible voters across the United States. The coalition, representing a diverse group of states, sends a letter to congressional leadership on April 1, 2025, urging them to reject H.R. 22, a bill that mandates in-person voter registration with specific federal or state documents like passports or birth certificates. Rayfield, speaking from Salem, Oregon, asserts that it is entirely possible to enhance election security without imposing such restrictive measures, warning that the legislation could disproportionately harm married women, active-duty service members, and other vulnerable groups. As of today, April 2, 2025, at 12:45 PM PDT, the debate over the SAVE Act intensifies, raising critical questions about the balance between election integrity and voter access in a deeply polarized political climate.
The SAVE Act, introduced by Representative Chip Roy (R-TX) in January 2025, seeks to amend the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993 by requiring voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship—such as a passport or birth certificate—when registering to vote in federal elections. The bill mandates that this documentation must be presented in person, effectively eliminating online voter registration systems currently utilized by 42 states, including Oregon. Rayfield and his coalition argue that this requirement reverses three decades of progress under the NVRA, which was designed to remove barriers to voter registration and boost democratic participation. “This law just makes it harder for people to vote,” Rayfield declares in a statement, emphasizing that election integrity can be maintained “while still making sure that every legitimate voter has an equal opportunity to cast their ballot without obstacles or discrimination.”
The coalition’s letter, addressed to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), highlights several specific concerns. One major issue is the impact on married women, particularly the estimated 80% who adopt their spouse’s last name after marriage. The SAVE Act requires that birth certificates match current legal names, meaning millions of women—approximately 69 million nationwide—could face barriers to registration if their documentation does not align. Additionally, the in-person registration requirement poses significant challenges for active-duty service members stationed far from their local election offices, potentially jeopardizing their ability to vote. The coalition also notes that over 21 million voting-age Americans lack ready access to a passport, birth certificate, or naturalization record, a figure that underscores the bill’s potential to disenfranchise large swaths of the population, particularly low-income and minority communities.
Oregon, a pioneer in voter access, has a storied history of expanding democratic participation. The state became the first to adopt automatic voter registration in 2015 with the Motor Voter Act, signed by then-Governor Kate Brown, leading to a surge in voter registrations. Oregon also established vote-by-mail as the standard mechanism for elections in 1996, a system that has resulted in some of the highest voter turnout rates in the nation—75% of eligible voters participated in the 2024 general election. Rayfield, who assumed the role of Attorney General in January 2025 after serving as Speaker of the Oregon House, has made protecting these systems a cornerstone of his tenure. He joins a coalition that includes attorneys general from Maryland, Illinois, Connecticut, Minnesota, New York, Nevada, Rhode Island, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Vermont, the District of Columbia, California, Maine, Washington, New Jersey, and Michigan, reflecting a broad resistance to the SAVE Act’s provisions.
Proponents of the SAVE Act, led by Roy and co-sponsored by 104 House Republicans, including top leaders like Majority Leader Steve Scalise and Majority Whip Tom Emmer, argue that the legislation is necessary to prevent non-citizen voting and restore public confidence in elections. Roy, speaking on the House floor in July 2024 when the bill first passed the House by a vote of 221-198, asserts, “American elections belong to American citizens, and the public’s confidence in those elections is the cornerstone of our republic.” The bill also requires states to remove non-citizens from voter rolls, establishes criminal penalties for election officials who register applicants without proof of citizenship, and grants access to federal citizenship data through the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database. Supporters point to concerns about election integrity, often amplified by former President Donald Trump, who has claimed without evidence that non-citizens vote in significant numbers to influence elections.
However, Rayfield and his coalition counter that non-citizen voting is exceedingly rare. Studies cited in their letter, including an audit by Georgia’s Secretary of State, reveal that only 0.0001% of votes in high-immigration jurisdictions are cast by non-citizens. Federal law already prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections, with penalties including imprisonment and deportation, and every state bans non-citizen voting in state elections. Election officials currently verify voter eligibility using state and federal data, such as citizenship records from the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration, as well as death records and postal change-of-address data. Critics of the SAVE Act, including the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, which represents 145 organizations, argue that the bill is a “solution in search of a problem,” designed to intimidate immigrant communities and communities of color while making it harder for naturalized citizens and voters of color to participate.
The SAVE Act’s requirements also pose significant administrative and financial burdens for states. The legislation would force states to overhaul their voter registration systems, create new document verification processes, and criminalize errors by election officials with penalties of up to five years in prison. In Oregon, where 55% of voter registrations are processed through motor vehicle departments—many of which handle renewals online—the shift to in-person registration could overwhelm election offices. Nationally, only 5.9% of voters registered in person at election offices in 2022, meaning a drastic increase in in-person registrations could lead to long lines, higher costs, and logistical challenges. Nonprofit VOTE, a national organization focused on voter engagement, warns that the bill would effectively end third-party voter registration drives, as groups would be unable to collect forms with accompanying proof of citizenship, further limiting access to the ballot.
The historical context of voter access in the U.S. provides a critical lens for this debate. The NVRA, often called the “Motor Voter” law, was enacted in 1993 to streamline voter registration and increase participation, particularly among underrepresented groups. It allows citizens to register at motor vehicle offices and other public agencies, a system that has been credited with adding millions to the voter rolls. However, efforts to impose stricter voting requirements have persisted, often under the guise of election security. The 2013 Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which gutted key provisions of the Voting Rights Act, removed federal oversight of election changes in states with histories of discrimination, leading to a wave of voter ID laws and other restrictions. Critics of the SAVE Act see it as part of this broader trend, arguing that it disproportionately affects marginalized groups while addressing a non-existent problem.
Breaking news updates as of 12:45 PM PDT on April 2, 2025, indicate that Oregon Congresswoman Maxine Dexter (D-OR) introduces an amendment to the SAVE Act on April 1, 2025, which would require state-level certification that the law’s requirements do not prevent eligible married women from voting. The amendment’s fate remains uncertain, as the bill is fast-tracked for a House floor vote, potentially bypassing committee review. Meanwhile, Rayfield’s office confirms that Oregon is investigating three cases of non-citizen voting referred by the Secretary of State in February 2025, though Rayfield stresses that such incidents are rare and do not justify the SAVE Act’s sweeping changes. Secretary of State Tobias Read, who oversees Oregon’s elections, has also signaled readiness to challenge any federal action that threatens the state’s voting system, including Trump’s March 2025 executive order on election integrity, which mirrors the SAVE Act’s proof-of-citizenship requirements.
The opposition to the SAVE Act comes amid heightened scrutiny of election laws following the 2024 presidential election, where Trump’s victory over Kamala Harris—41% to 55% in Oregon—reinvigorated Republican efforts to tighten voting rules. Trump’s executive order, signed on March 27, 2025, directs federal agencies to enforce citizenship verification and has been criticized by voting rights groups for potentially disenfranchising the estimated 21.3 million Americans who lack proof of citizenship, according to a 2023 Brennan Center for Justice report. Oregon’s vote-by-mail system, which allows ballots postmarked by Election Day to be received within seven days, saw 13,596 ballots counted in this window in 2024, highlighting the state’s commitment to maximizing voter access—a stark contrast to the SAVE Act’s restrictive approach.
As the SAVE Act moves forward, its implications for the 2026 midterm elections loom large. Rayfield and his coalition urge Congress to focus on pro-voter reforms that ensure equitable access to the ballot, rather than imposing barriers rooted in what they describe as “fear-mongering and divisive rhetoric.” The debate underscores a fundamental tension in American democracy: how to secure elections without sacrificing the right to vote. For now, Oregon remains at the forefront of this battle, with Rayfield and his allies determined to protect the state’s legacy of voter inclusion against what they see as an assault on democratic principles.
Sources:
- Video: https://youtu.be/uWR5IX2Jwsw
- Oregon Department of Justice, “Attorney General Rayfield and Coalition Oppose Federal Legislation That Would Create Substantial Barriers to Voting,” April 1, 2025
- Yahoo News, “Attorney General Rayfield urges House leaders to oppose ‘oppressive’ elections bill,” April 1, 2025
- Congress.gov, “Text – H.R.8281 – 118th Congress (2023-2024): SAVE Act,” May 6, 2024
- Center for American Progress, “The SAVE Act: Overview and Facts,” January 31, 2025
- Oregonlive.com, “Oregon officials say Trump’s voting executive order likely to face legal challenges,” March 27, 2025
- Civilrights.org, “Civil Rights Groups Letter in Opposition to SAVE Act,” September 6, 2024
- Nonprofit VOTE, “The SAVE Act is the Wrong Solution for a Non-Problem,” February 7, 2025
- Oregon Department of Justice, “Statement From Attorney General Dan Rayfield on Investigation Into 3 Non-Citizen Voting Cases,” February 22, 2025
- Newsweek, “Full List of Democrats Who Voted For GOP Voter ID Bill,” July 10, 2024
