This policy update highlights key developments related to voting rights and civic participation within the Democracy & Civic Action program, with a focus on the Census Data Governance & Redistricting Battles and SAVE Act (Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act).
Census Data Governance and Redistricting Battles
- The Census – Then and Now
The U.S. Census provides the population data used to inform redistricting, the process of drawing political district boundaries. Using a hybrid approach, it counts residents from every household via internet, mail, phone, or in-person follow-ups. The decennial census is conducted every ten years with the next one scheduled for 2030.
Decisions based on census population counts can influence representation and the distribution of resources for up to a decade. The next decennial census is scheduled for 2030.
However, some researchers and policy analysts have raised questions about proposed changes to Census practices and how they may affect data collection and use.
In early 2026, the federal government reduced the number of planned Census operational test sites from six to two. These test sites are used to evaluate data collection methods and overall census operations. A smaller number of sites may limit geographic diversity in testing, which some researchers note could affect how well findings reflect different regions.
Changes to survey design have also been discussed. A revised practice test includes questions from the longer American Community Survey (ACS) in place of the shorter decennial census form. The standard census questionnaire takes an average of about ten minutes to complete, while the ACS typically takes longer. Some researchers have noted that longer surveys may affect response rates and data collection processes.
Additionally, legislation has been introduced in Congress to include a citizenship question in future decennial censuses. In the 118th Congress (2023–2024), the Equal Representation Act (H.R. 7109) passed the U.S. House but did not advance in the Senate. A similar bill, the Equal Representation Act (H.R. 151), has been introduced in the 119th Congress and, as of December 2025, is awaiting consideration in the House.
These proposals would require the inclusion of a citizenship question on the decennial census and would change how population counts are used for congressional apportionment by focusing on U.S. citizens rather than the total resident population, which is currently used. Some researchers and policy analysts have raised concerns that such changes could affect how representation and federal resources are distributed, particularly in areas with larger noncitizen and immigrant populations.
Finally, some researchers and policymakers have raised questions about data privacy and security in proposed changes to census operations. One proposal includes using U.S. Postal Service (USPS) employees as census enumerators. Census enumerators operate under Title 13 confidentiality protections, which restrict data sharing and include legal penalties for violations. USPS employees are governed by broader federal privacy laws and are not covered under Title 13, leading some to note differences in how data protections would apply.
Proposals for census reform address several aspects of governance and data protection. Some policymakers and researchers have discussed changes to the structure and oversight of the Census Bureau, including proposals to establish it as an independent agency separate from the Department of Commerce and to expand Congressional oversight. These discussions have been informed in part by debates surrounding census operations in 2020.
Recent legislation, such as the Protecting Americans’ Social Security Data Act, introduced in March 2025, focuses on data confidentiality. The bill proposes limiting access to Social Security Administration (SSA) systems that contain personally identifiable information by certain political appointees and special government employees, and outlines provisions related to their role in census-related activities.
- Redistricting Battles and Legal Conflicts
Typically, the U.S. Census has been conducted once during the first year of each decade. Once the Census Bureau delivers new population data, the redistricting process occurs during the subsequent two years of each decade.
Federal standards for census-based redistricting begin with apportionment, the process of distributing seats in the U.S. House of Representatives among the states based on population counts from the decennial census. Once apportionment is determined, states redraw their congressional and legislative district boundaries to reflect population shifts within the Census data, while ensuring that districts remained roughly equal in size.
Redistricting between censuses is rare. Between 1970 and 2005, only a small number of states, including Texas and Georgia, redrew congressional district maps outside of the standard post-census cycle.
Several states have pursued or considered mid-decade redistricting efforts in recent years, including Virginia, Utah, New York, California, Indiana, Kansas, South Carolina, and Washington. These actions have involved a combination of legislative proposals, court rulings, and ballot initiatives, with varying outcomes.
Courts at both the state and federal levels have played a significant role in reviewing these efforts. Legal challenges to district maps have been filed in multiple states, and in some cases, court decisions have affected the timing and implementation of redistricting plans.
These disputes are shaped in part by the Supreme Court’s decision in Rucho v. Common Cause, which held that claims of partisan gerrymandering present political questions beyond the jurisdiction of federal courts, leaving such challenges primarily to state courts and the political process.
In Illinois, a bipartisan “Fair Maps” initiative introduced in August 2025 aimed to place a redistricting constitutional amendment on the November 2026 ballot. As of early 2026, the initiative has not advanced, with some advocacy groups raising concerns about its approach and implementation.
- Impact on the South Asian Community
Census data and redistricting processes can influence political representation, particularly for minority populations. Population counts are used to draw district boundaries, and variations in data accuracy may affect how communities are represented at the local, state, and federal levels.
Some populations, including immigrant and minority communities, have been identified in prior research as being undercounted in census data. Factors such as language access, survey design, and participation rates may contribute to these patterns. Differences in response rates across demographic groups were also observed in the 2020 Census.
For South Asian communities in the United States, these dynamics may affect how population growth is reflected in states such as New Jersey, Texas, and California. Census data can shape district boundaries and inform resource distribution, which may have implications for community representation and policy engagement.
On January 15, 2026, SAAPRI hosted an Engaged Community Series Panel, entitled: Protecting Democracy: Ensuring Fair Representation in an Age of Gerrymandering and Voter Suppression. Panelists highlighted the ongoing risks to voting rights posed by redistricting. They emphasized that redistricting is a voting rights issue in every state, noting that “threats to fair maps exist in both red and blue states, regardless of partisan control,” and that partisan alignment does not automatically protect communities of color. Mid-cycle redistricting was identified as particularly risky, as it can confuse voters and produce long-term impacts that outlast election cycles.
The panel also outlined strategies for countering these threats. Sustained grassroots pressure, clear values-based messaging, and disciplined coalition work were cited as key to success. As Leah Wong, Voting Rights Director of the Asian American Legal Defense & Education Fund, noted: “The system is not designed for transparency, which is exactly why everyday people have to show up.”
Panelists shared examples from Indiana and Texas, where coordinated grassroot advocacy and public engagement – like testifying at hearings, submitting public comments, and mobilizing constituents – meaningfully altered outcomes and blocked restrictive provisions, like proof-of-citizenship requirements, from voter suppression legislation. These insights show that South Asian communities, like other minority populations, are directly affected by the structural risks of redistricting and undercounting, making informed, sustained engagement at the state and local level essential for protecting fair representation.
SAVE Act (Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act)
- What it is:
The SAVE America Act is a federal bill that would change the way that Americans register to vote. It would require voters to present – in person – documentary proof of citizenship (such as a passport, birth certificate or naturalization documents) anytime they register to vote or change their registration. States would also be required to remove noncitizens from their voter rolls and submit voter lists to the Department of Homeland Security for verification against a federal database.
The SAVE America bill is an updated version of the SAVE bill, which passed the House but failed to clear the Senate in 2024. The most recent version was amended (amendment #4732) to include a provision which would require voters to present valid, government-issued photo identification before voting in federal elections, or include a copy of photo ID for absentee or mail-in voting. These changes may affect online and mail-in voter registration currently allowed by 42 states, and affect voting practices across the country.
- Status/Most Recent Updates:
On February 11, 2026, the SAVE America Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a narrow margin. This marks the third time a version of the bill has passed the House since 2024. The legislation was then under consideration in the Senate, where intense debate began in mid-March of 2026.
As of April 21st, 2026, the SAVE America Act effectively stalled and failed as the U.S. Senate stopped its weeks-long debate amidst opposition from lawmakers on both sides. Early on April 23rd, Republican Sen. John Kennedy (LA) offered an amendment to attach provisions of the SAVE America Act to the reconciliation bill; however, this was defeated 48-50, with four Republicans joining the Democrats in voting no.
Though this Act has failed at the federal level, experts argue that the battle is not over. At the state level, several states have advanced similar legislation related to voter identification requirements. In November, voters in Alaska, Arkansas, Kansas, South Dakota, and West Virginia will consider ballot measures related to noncitizen voting provisions.
- Impact:
Some individuals may not have immediate access to proof-of-citizenship documents, and certain groups, including first-time voters, older adults, and individuals in rural or low-income communities, may face additional logistical challenges in meeting documentation requirements.
Access to required documentation can vary across populations, which may result in differing impacts on participation. For example, some AAPI voters, including South Asian Americans, may not have key documents readily available.
Supporters of the bill state that these measures are intended to strengthen election security and standardize verification processes. Critics argue that the requirements may create additional barriers to voter registration and participation.