A strong case for the unconstitutionality of H.R. 22 — SAVE Act under the 26th Amendment centers on the bill's potential to "abridge" the right to vote for citizens 18 years of age or older by creating unique, significant barriers that disproportionately impact young voters.

The 26th Amendment states that the right of citizens who are 18 or older to vote "shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age". A legal challenge would likely focus on the following pillars:

1. Disproportionate Lack of Required Documentation

Younger voters are among the demographics least likely to possess the specific documents required by the SAVE Act.

• Passport Ownership: Young adults (ages 18–24) have lower rates of passport ownership compared to older, more affluent demographics due to the high cost ($130) and less frequent international travel.
• Access to Birth Certificates: Many young voters, particularly students or those who have recently moved, may not have immediate access to their original certified birth certificates, which are often kept by parents or in safe storage in a different location.
• Cost as a Barrier: For a young person starting their financial life, the fees for obtaining a passport or a certified birth record can represent a significant economic hurdle that functions as an age-based abridgment of their rights.

2. Barriers to In-Person Registration

The SAVE Act effectively eliminates online and mail-in registration for many new applicants by requiring them to present their proof of citizenship in person to an election official.

• Impact on Students: College students often live away from their permanent residence or the jurisdiction where their vital records are held. Requiring in-person presentation of documents at a local election office during business hours is a "material requirement" that is uniquely difficult for students to satisfy.
• Transportation and Time Constraints: Young voters are statistically more likely to rely on public transportation or hold hourly jobs without flexible leave, making the requirement to visit a government office in person a substantial burden not shared equally by older, more established voters.

3. Frequent Re-Registration Burdens

Under the Act, the proof-of-citizenship requirement applies every time a voter registers or updates their registration.

• Highly Mobile Population: Young adults are the most mobile segment of the U.S. population, frequently moving for education, internships, or early-career opportunities.
• Compounded Hurdles: Every move necessitates a new in-person presentation of documentary proof. This creates a "loop of disenfranchisement" for young voters, where the administrative and financial cost of maintaining a valid registration is significantly higher for them than for older voters who move less frequently.

4. Violation of the "Equal Openness" and "Abridgment" Standards

The 26th Amendment was intended to ensure that the path to the ballot box is not made more arduous for citizens simply because of their age.

• Abridgment of the Right: Courts have noted that the term "abridge" in the 26th Amendment is broad, covering not just the total denial of the vote but also the imposition of "unnecessary" or "onerous" hurdles that make voting harder for young people.
• Lack of Proportionality: A challenge would argue that the government’s stated interest—preventing noncitizen voting—does not justify a mandate that places such a heavy, repeating burden on millions of young, legal citizens who are historically already underrepresented in the electorate.