Opinion>Opinions - Campaign

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

Trump’s top two voting initiatives could disenfranchise many Americans

Comments:

by Steven Lubet, opinion contributor - 04/27/26 11:30 AM ET

Comments:

Link copied

by Steven Lubet, opinion contributor - 04/27/26 11:30 AM ET

Comments:

Link copied

Michael Martinez prays as he joins supporters of birthright citizenship at a rally outside the Supreme Court while the justices hear oral arguments on whether President Donald Trump can deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, Wednesday, April 1, 2026. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Two of President Trump’s major priorities may be about to collide, with potentially calamitous results.

Trump’s executive order abolishing birthright citizenship, now before the Supreme Court, is at direct odds with the SAVE America Act, requiring proof of citizenship to vote, which Trump has been insistently pushing Congress to pass.

The conflict between the two is inescapable. The act demands official verification of citizenship to vote, while the executive order could effectively discredit most forms of proof.

Let’s begin with the executive order, formally titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” which purports to recognize birthright citizenship only of children with at least one parent who is either a citizen or a “lawful permanent resident” of the U.S.

That contradicts the 14th Amendment, and an 1898 U.S. Supreme Court decision, plainly stating that those born in the U.S. “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” The Trump administration has argued, however, in a tortuous two-step, that “jurisdiction” actually means “allegiance,” which the babies of “illegal” or temporary entrants supposedly do not hold.

Under this theory, a U.S. birth certificate, would no longer constitute presumptive evidence of citizenship. The same goes for other forms of evidence, such as passports, which derive from birth certificates and are silent about parental immigration status.

Even a parent’s birth certificate would be questionable, absent proof of at least one grandparent’s citizenship. Ironically, only naturalized citizens would be able to prove their bona fides, which do not depend on ancestry.

Now let’s turn to the SAVE America Act, which has passed the U.S. House of and is now pending in the Senate. It would require all new applicants for voter registration, or re-registration, to provide “‘documentary proof‘ of United States citizenship,” such as a valid U.S. passport.

Other acceptable forms of proof would include a birth certificate, a naturalization certificate, an adoption decree or a consular report of birth abroad — but only when accompanied by some type of government issued photo identification.

Crucially, existing forms of such documentation typically do not say anything about parental citizenship or lawful residency, and consequently could not establish definitive proof, even under the Save America Act, if Trump’s executive order prevails.

Well over 10 million American adults relocate or change addresses every year, and many more change their names due to marriage or divorce. It is unknown how many would be unable to provide ready proof of citizenship to reregister to vote, but it would surely be many more under Trump’s executive order, because birth certificates would no longer be conclusive of citizenship.

True, Trump’s executive order purports to apply only prospectively, with enforcement beginning with children born 30 days after its effective date, but that’s just the start.

In his argument before the Supreme Court, Solicitor General John Sauer declared that the limitation on birthright citizenship was the “original public meaning” of the 14th Amendment. If accepted by the court, it would mean that millions of American-born children, due to their parents’ status, had never been citizens in the first place. After all, the Constitution’s original meaning must obviously take precedence over forbearance expressed in an executive order.

Because all elections are conducted at the state level, there would be nothing to stop local voting officials, invoking the SAVE Act, from accepting documentation from favored applicants, while rejecting the documents of anyone suspected of having the wrong parents. Once challenged, it could be burdensome or impossible for an applicant to prove that at least one parent was a citizen or lawful immigrant. But that might well be the point.

If Trump’s birthright restriction becomes law, many qualified voters may not even risk attempting to register, which is a felony for non-citizens, out of