This past November, I had the opportunity to engage in my first presidential election. Being out of state for school, I requested an absentee ballot. Like most new voters, I was quickly overwhelmed with navigating my state’s official website. Once I received, completed, and mailed my ballot back, I obsessively checked the status so that I could find a solution in the case that it was rejected.

Many young voters struggle with similar woes, from simply filling the ballot out, to meeting deadlines, and even struggles with postage. These factors have led to a disproportionate number of young voters’ mail-in ballots being rejected. These concerns become even more pressing when considering intentional laws and policies that prevent certain groups from voting with ease.    

Voter suppression has long been utilized to bolster party movements. Barriers through laws, and challenges surrounding voting accessibility for certain groups are utilized to discourage people from voting. Today, voter suppression often takes the form of purging voter rolls aimed at removing ineligible voters, for instance, someone who has moved, but it can also result in the removal of eligible voters. Other ways voter suppression has occurred is through a lack of adequate polling places, especially in low-income areas, and restrictive laws surrounding voter identification at the polls. 

According to the ACLU, voter suppression forms often disproportionately impact BIPOC communities, low income citizens, students and naturalized U.S. citizens. 

Recently, a bill referred to as The “SAVE Act” was passed in the House. This bill calls for ‘documentary proof of United States citizenship,’ actively amending the  National Voter Registration Act of 1993. This bill is problematic in relation to voter accessibility. Voting rights groups say it “[…] will pose a barrier for millions of American women and others who have changed their legal name because of marriage, assimilation or to better align with their gender identity […and could] disenfranchise others from marginalized communities who are less likely to have the necessary documentation readily available”.

In particular, for students whose name does not match their birth certificate, a common reality for many college students, voting becomes a lot harder as identity is questioned. Laws restricting non-citizens from voting already exist, posing the question of what  the goal of the SAVE Act truly is? The bill prompts people to believe the false narrative that non-citizens are voting.

As a first time voter, who has not voted enough times to have personal experience of the polls, these false narratives can be dangerous. For instance, I rely strongly on research and media to provide evidence that the electoral system is accurate. If I were to solely utilize media sources conveying false narratives, my outlook on the polls would be much different. In connection with voter suppression, rhetoric that misleadingly creates distrust around democratic processes “[…] fuel some state legislatures’ efforts to pass restrictive voting laws that aim to make voting harder for targeted communities”.

This bill directly impacts groups who have been targeted by voter suppression laws. The Save Act aims to create barriers in order to mute the civic engagement of some, strengthening the voice of a handpicked demographic. If passed into Law, this bill would set a precedent for similar legislation that mutes voices in the future. 

Literacy tests, known for preventing African Americans from registering to vote which  ended around 1965, originated in Connecticut as a tactic in preventing Irish immigrants from voting. Since then, in Connecticut, progress has been made towards eradicating laws that fortify voter suppression. One fairly recent example occurred in 2020 when Connecticut changed a law that restricted people from voting absentee unless they were sick, had a disability, or couldn’t make it to the polls due to religious factors.

This, however, is just the beginning of work that needs to be done in order to fight for and preserve the voting rights of minority groups in both state and federal elections. This momentum can’t stop here. Civic engagement is critical in pushing back against modern day voter suppression. Marginalized groups and new voters are as entitled to a voice through voting as anyone else.

I encourage voters to look critically at voter laws, and to review the Connecticut voting guidelines in preparation for the next elections. Voter education, like the voter guide linked above, is important for understanding when, where, and how to vote, and pushes back barriers to voting.  

Emily Charest is a student at Connecticut College.