This year marks the 60th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965—one of the most significant pieces of civil rights legislation in American history. Passed during the height of the Civil Rights Movement, the VRA was designed to protect the fundamental right to vote by prohibiting racial discrimination in voting practices.
As the nation reflects on six decades of progress and ongoing challenges in ensuring equal access to the ballot box, a new piece of legislation—the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act—is igniting fierce debate over voting rights and access in the United States.
A legacy of access: the Voting Rights Act at 60
Signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on August 6, 1965, the Voting Rights Act aimed to eliminate barriers such as literacy tests, poll taxes and other mechanisms historically used to suppress the Black vote and disenfranchise minority communities—especially in the American South.
Over the years, the VRA has been amended several times to expand protections, including provisions for bilingual ballots and federal oversight in jurisdictions with histories of discrimination. However, the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder significantly weakened the Act by removing the requirement for certain states to obtain federal preclearance before changing voting laws—a move many civil rights advocates say opened the door to new forms of voter suppression.
As we reach this milestone, celebrations honoring the courage and activism that led to the VRA’s passage are shadowed by legislative developments that critics argue could reverse many of its core achievements.
The SAVE Act: safeguard or suppression?
Introduced in 2024 by House Republicans, the SAVE Act proposes to require proof of U.S. citizenship—such as a passport or birth certificate—when registering to vote in federal elections. Supporters argue the bill is necessary to prevent noncitizens from voting, pointing to the importance of maintaining election integrity.
“Voting is a sacred right of citizenship,” said one of the bill’s sponsors. “This legislation ensures that only eligible Americans have a say in our democracy.”
However, the law’s opponents see it differently. Civil rights groups, election officials and Democrats argue that the SAVE Act addresses a virtually nonexistent problem while potentially disenfranchising millions of eligible voters—especially those who lack easy access to documentation, such as older voters, people of color, naturalized citizens, students and rural residents.
“Noncitizen voting in federal elections is already illegal and exceedingly rare,” said a spokesperson for the Brennan Center for Justice. “The SAVE Act is a solution in search of a problem—and it risks suppressing the vote of many marginalized Americans.”
Conflicting visions of democracy
The controversy surrounding the SAVE Act reflects a broader ideological divide over the future of voting in America. One side prioritizes strict eligibility enforcement, often in response to concerns about election fraud. The other emphasizes expanding access, especially for historically marginalized communities.
As the Voting Rights Act reaches its 60th anniversary, the tension between these visions is more apparent than ever.
“This isn’t just a policy disagreement—it’s a battle over the soul of American democracy,” said Rep. Terri Sewell (D-AL), who has championed voting rights legislation including the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
The road ahead
The SAVE Act passed the House in a narrow vote but faces a less certain future in the Senate. Meanwhile, advocacy groups continue to push for federal protections to restore and expand the VRA’s original provisions. With lawsuits already brewing and voter access remaining a pivotal issue in the 2026 midterms, the legacy of the Voting Rights Act continues to evolve.
As the nation looks back on 60 years of progress, the question remains: Will America honor that legacy by protecting the right to vote—or erode it in the name of security?
