An Obama-appointed federal judge on Wednesday issued a sweeping order blocking President Trump’s voter ID executive order, which would have required proof of citizenship for voter registration.
U.S. District Court Judge Denise Casper, who is based in Boston, was nominated by former President Barack Obama and confirmed by the U.S. Senate in 2010 <a href="https://www.congress.gov/nomination/111th-congress/1710">via voice vote.</a> With Wednesday&#8217;s order, she effectively turned her preliminary injunction into a permanent block on the administration’s attempt to overhaul elections without Congress. 
Casper dismissed the administration’s claim that the lawsuit was premature, ruling that election oversight belongs to the states and Congress under the Constitution and that Trump’s requirements violated the separation of powers.
The Constitution “does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,” she wrote, according to the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-elections-judge-358912bcb6c7223b3d2d36465156fde9">Associated Press</a>.
The issue of late-arriving ballots is currently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/americas-biggest-legal-bombshells-are-still-ahead?author=Jacob+Wheeler&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=26&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=America%E2%80%99s+Biggest+Legal+Bombshells+Are+Still+Ahead">before the U.S. Supreme Court</a>, with a ruling expected as soon as Thursday. Justices will decide whether a Mississippi law that allows a grace period for mail-in ballots is constitutional. A ruling in favor of the Republican National Committee, however, could upend voting rules in dozens of states. 
“I hope the Chief Justice understands the path these rogue judges have charted for the judiciary,” White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller <a href="https://x.com/StephenM/status/2069828946246381808?s=20">said</a> in response to the ruling. 
In March 2025, President Trump <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/preserving-and-protecting-the-integrity-of-american-elections/">signed an executive order</a> requiring proof of citizenship to register for federal elections and mandating that ballots be received on election day. The order directed states to share voter data with federal agencies and cooperate in prosecuting election crimes, and threatened to withhold federal funding from noncompliant states.
“Despite pioneering self-government, the United States now fails to enforce basic and necessary election protections employed by modern, developed nations, as well as those still developing,” the directive read.  
The ruling deals another blow to Trump’s election security agenda, coming hours after he refused to sign bipartisan housing legislation over the Senate’s failure to pass the SAVE America Act.
The president said in a mid-morning Truth Social post that he had canceled his planned press conference on Capitol Hill and would not be signing the housing bill, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-gives-washington-a-taste-of-its-own-medicine-refuses-to-sign-housing-bill">The Daily Wire</a> reported. 
“Today’s Housing News Conference and Signing is hereby cancelled until such time as we pass the desperately needed SAVE AMERICA ACT, which I consider to be a National Emergency,” Trump said.
Earlier Wednesday morning, he foreshadowed his frustrations with a post about Democrat Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s involvement with the housing bill.
“The Elizabeth ‘Pocahontas’ Warren centric housing bill, which is of minor importance compared to lower interest rates, and even FISA, pales in comparison to passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT,” Trump wrote. “That is what Americans, both Dumocrats, Republicans, and everyone else, care about.”
The Department of Justice is expected to appeal the ruling.

US-VOTE-POLITIC

The Election Security Measure An Obama Judge Just Blocked

News

SAVE America Act

Trump

Voting

President Donald Trump fired off a Truth Social broadside on Thursday, accusing California Democrats of stealing the state&#8217;s gubernatorial primary — and given the Golden State&#8217;s long, sordid history of electoral shenanigans, he&#8217;s got plenty of reason to be suspicious.
&#8220;There&#8217;s BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California,&#8221; Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116690093479247202">posted</a>. &#8220;Votes are all tied up. May not be in for weeks. Under investigation by the U.S. Attorney&#8217;s Office in Los Angeles. Why the vote counting DELAY???&#8221;
The <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/hilton-becerra-lead-tight-primary-race-california-governor-2026-06-03/">results</a> from Tuesday&#8217;s jungle primary are indeed dragging. With all precincts partially reporting in the governor&#8217;s race, Trump-endorsed Republican TV host Steve Hilton leads the pack with 27.6% of the vote, while former Biden Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra sits in second at 25.6% — each clearing 1.3 million votes. Liberal billionaire Tom Steyer lurks in third at 19.8%, and since most California ballots are cast by mail — with postmarked ballots accepted up to a week after Election Day — the final two finalists advancing to November are far from settled.
If the results hold, California gets the rare spectacle of a true Republican vs. Democrat November showdown, with Hilton facing Becerra for the seat being vacated by term-limited Gov. Gavin Newsom. Becerra, if he wins in November, would be the first Latino elected governor of a state where 40% of residents are Hispanic. Hilton — a British-born former Fox News host who became a U.S. citizen in 2021 — is hoping to follow fellow immigrant and Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger to Sacramento.
Trump celebrated Hilton&#8217;s early lead, posting that the former television commentator &#8220;will turn California around, quickly — and the Federal Government will be there, with him, to help!&#8221;
But Trump&#8217;s fraud allegations aren&#8217;t coming out of nowhere. California Democrats have spent years engineering the electoral deck.
In November 2025, voters <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/californias-redistricting-ballot-measure-overwhelmingly-passes?author=Cameron+Arcand&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=California%E2%80%99s+Redistricting+Ballot+Measure+Overwhelmingly+Passes">passed Proposition 50</a> — dubbed the &#8220;Election Rigging Response Act&#8221; — which suspended California&#8217;s independent redistricting commission and handed Democrats control of a new congressional map explicitly designed to flip five Republican-held House seats. Newsom and former Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi championed it. Former California Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger opposed it. It passed with 64% of the vote in an election that the state mailed ballots to all voters.
Then, in February 2026, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco — himself a Republican gubernatorial candidate — <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/democrat-ag-makes-behind-the-scenes-ballot-move-what-is-he-afraid-of">executed search warrants</a> and seized 650,000 ballots from that very Prop 50 election after a citizen watchdog group identified a stunning discrepancy: 45,896 more votes tallied than physical ballots received. California&#8217;s Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta immediately moved to block the count — and the ballots were scheduled for destruction in May. The question that hangs in the air: if the results were clean, why fight so hard to stop someone from counting the paper?
California&#8217;s electoral history offers other reasons for suspicion. In the 2024 congressional elections, Democrats <a href="https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2024-12-07/californias-congressional-races-are-a-bright-spot-for-democrats">flipped three Republican House seats</a> — including one by a paper-thin 187-vote margin that wasn&#8217;t called until a month after Election Day, with both parties deploying armies of staffers to &#8220;cure&#8221; flagged mail ballots. More Democratic ballots were cured than Republican ones — by a margin exceeding the final vote spread.
Republicans are energized heading into November. Early turnout data from the primary showed the GOP outpacing Democrats in several key counties.
But in California, where mail ballots arrive for weeks and ballot-curing operations can erase narrow deficits, election night results have a funny way of shifting in Democrats&#8217; favor by the time the last envelope is opened.

Trump Signs Order Directing Customs Crackdown Amid Trade Gaps

Trump Blasts ‘Big Cheating’ In California As Votes Trickle In

California Elections

Donald Trump

California Republicans appear energized heading into the state’s closely watched June 2 primary, holding an early turnout advantage as Democrats scramble to unite behind a candidate in multiple key races.
The Golden State sends every registered voter a mail-in ballot, arguing that the policy gives voters ample time and access to make their voices heard. With a few weeks until Election Day, more than 900,000 have returned ballots in California&#8217;s primary, which features a contentious gubernatorial race plagued by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/swalwell-accuser-claims-dem-drugged-choked-and-raped-her?author=Jacob+Wheeler&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=73&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Swalwell+Accuser+Claims+Dem+Drugged%2C+Choked%2C+And+Raped+Her">scandals</a> and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/democrat-crashes-out-on-reporter-before-she-can-even-ask-a-question?author=Jacob+Wheeler&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=13&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Democrat+Crashes+Out+On+Reporter+Before+She+Can+Even+Ask+A+Question">stumbles</a> and the Los Angeles mayoral contest. 
The data,<a href="https://tracker.politicaldata.com/?type=statewide"> compiled by Political Data Intelligence</a>, paints an encouraging early picture for Republicans. As of May 15, statewide Republican turnout stood at 6%, compared to 4% for Democrats. Despite trailing Democrats nearly 2-to-1 in voter registration, Republicans remain competitive in the total vote share.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
California Early Voting Now vs at this point in 2022
At this point in 2022: 
🔵 54% 
🔴 26% 
🟡 20%
(719k Voted)
Now: 
🔵 41% (-13) 
🔴 37% (+11) 
🟡 22% (+2)
(906K Voted) <a href="https://t.co/dI1IfKRDjB">https://t.co/dI1IfKRDjB</a> <a href="https://t.co/FRGT6nYz2E">pic.twitter.com/FRGT6nYz2E</a>
— OSZ (@OpenSourceZone) <a href="https://twitter.com/OpenSourceZone/status/2055711433568969212?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 16, 2026</a></blockquote>
Of the 900,000 ballots returned so far, 371,130 were cast by registered Democrats, compared to 334,791 from registered Republicans. Another 199,967 came from independents or voters with no party affiliation. GOP returns have increased 11% compared to this point in the 2022 midterm cycle. 
In battleground Orange County — where President Ronald Reagan once joked that <a href="https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/remarks-republican-campaign-rally-fullerton-california">“good Republicans go before they die”</a> — the divide is even more pronounced. Roughly 6% of registered voters have returned ballots, with Republicans holding an advantage of more than 10,000 votes. 
In San Diego County, where Democrats make up the majority of registered voters, Republicans have posted an 11% turnout rate — nearly double the Democratic rate of 6% — and account for a majority of returned ballots.
Even in deep-blue Los Angeles County, home to the marquee showdown between Mayor Karen Bass and Spencer Pratt, Republicans hold a 4% turnout rate, compared to a sluggish 2% for Democrats. Democrats maintain a raw vote lead in the City of Los Angeles, reflecting their significant registration advantage over Republicans.
Older white voters make up the overwhelming majority of the early vote so far, according to PDI&#8217;s data. 
“Republicans are potentially returning their ballots at a pre-2020 rate, before [President Donald] Trump and other leaders discouraged it,” PDI Vice President Paul Mitchell <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/05/16/us-news/california-sees-massive-surge-in-republican-votes-as-more-than-900k-ballots-already-returned/?utm_medium=social&amp;utm_campaign=nypost&amp;utm_source=twitter">told The New York Post.</a> “It’s kind of typical of a low-turnout election that these are the people that always vote in every election. They probably almost always vote early, and they’re getting their ballots in right away.”
On the Republican side, voters have to choose between former Fox News host Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco.
Former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra leads the crowded Democratic field, followed by progressive billionaire Tom Steyer, former Orange County Congresswoman Katie Porter, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. 
Under California’s “jungle primary” system, the top two vote-getters advance to the general election in November regardless of party.

Americans voting in an election

California Republicans See Surge In Early Voting With Democrats In Disarray

California

Elections

Politics

Primary

Republican

While the nation focuses on Congress and the fierce debate over the SAVE America Act, a critical lawsuit is playing out in the United States Supreme Court. This week, the Justices heard oral arguments in <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/watson-v-republican-national-committee/">Watson v. RNC</a>. The central question: Can states count mail ballots that arrive days — even weeks — after polls close? According to the law, history, and common sense, the answer must be no.
For most of American history, states required that ballots be received by Election Day. Congress acted as early as 1845 to set a uniform election date, and until the last few decades it was well understood that states cannot unilaterally extend voting beyond it.
Yet, that is exactly what 14 states and the District of Columbia are doing. Mississippi’s law offers a five-day grace period, while others range from as few as one day to two weeks or more. But the exact length of these periods is not important. Historically, a ballot has not been considered “cast” until it is in the hands of an election official. By extending their deadlines, states are illegally extending the election itself. As the Secretaries of State of Louisiana and Wyoming point out in a <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-1260/396453/20260217143551649_24-1260_Brief.pdf">brief</a> to the Court, this scheme risks delays and public spectacles where late ballots flip results after voting is over, both of which sap trust from the system.
Most states require ballots be received by Election Day, and that <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/table-11-receipt-and-postmark-deadlines-for-absentee-mail-ballots">list is growing.</a> Last year, Kansas, Ohio, Utah, and North Dakota all set Election Day deadlines. The public overwhelmingly supports this. A new <a href="https://honestelections.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Watson-v-RNC-Polling-Memo.pdf">poll</a> by Honest Elections Project shows that 83% of Americans agree that every ballot should be received by Election Day, while 78% say Election Day deadlines make voting more secure. Nearly 60% say they would not trust election results if late ballots are counted, with Democrats evenly split — clear evidence of deep, bipartisan distrust.
Despite this, the (mostly blue) states with late deadlines argue they are crucial to ensure that “every vote counts.” Yet most sprang up in just the last few years; <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-1260/396356/20260217101242321_Amicus%20Brief%20Merits.pdf">seven</a> states only <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/the-evolution-of-absentee-mail-voting-laws-2020-through-2022">adopted</a> them in the COVID era. If they were not necessary in 1900, 2000, or even 2018, how can they be indispensable now?
With more people voting by mail, critics claim extended deadlines guard against postal delays and ballot rejection. U.S. Election Assistance Commission <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-1260/396356/20260217101242321_Amicus%20Brief%20Merits.pdf">data</a> show otherwise. Massachusetts established a three-day grace period and rejected as many late ballots in 2024 as it did in 2016 under the old rules. Nevada rejected more in 2024 than in 2016 after adopting a four-day grace period and all-mail elections.
These states ignore an easy alternative: encourage mail-in voters to request and mail their ballots earlier. When Ohio moved from 10 days to just four, rejections declined. The same is true in Iowa under its new Election Day deadline. Clearly, voters adapt when laws change. When states move deadlines up, voters act sooner. When they push deadlines back, voters delay.
That sets them up for failure. Ballots frequently miss even extended deadlines due to mail delays. There are other obstacles, too: states typically require that late ballots be postmarked, but postmarking is inconsistent. Many ballots are never postmarked, or their marks are smudged or illegible. A new USPS <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/24/2025-20740/postmarks-and-postal-possession">rule</a> means that ballots may not be postmarked the day they are mailed. In other words, late ballot laws leave voters one bad postmark away from disenfranchisement.
The Post Office has long <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/7035581-USPS-General-Counsel-Letter-July-2020/">admonished</a> states to adjust their voting laws to fit the realities of today’s mail service. Many have refused. The Watson case could be the nudge they need to fix their broken systems.
With a ruling likely in June, critics are predicting chaos in the midterms. They ignore that states would have more than four months to adjust. They claim that military voters will be hard-hit but overlook that federal law requires overseas ballots be mailed 45 days before elections and specifically exempts them from the broader Election Day deadline.
Rather than stoking outrage, election officials in these states should focus on preparing for the change, or better yet, for legislatures to repeal their late ballot laws immediately. The public won’t look kindly on officials delaying action, especially if they aim to score points from entirely avoidable chaos.
For too many years, late ballot laws have turned elections into a guessing game while fueling doubt and distrust. Election Day deadlines are clear, simple to administer, and easy for voters to adjust to. With Watson v. RNC, the Supreme Court has a chance to end late ballots once and for all. Every voter should hope they do.
* * *
Jason Snead is the executive director of Honest Elections Project.

Pennsylvania Elections Officials Process Ballots On Election Day

You Can Kiss Republicans Goodbye If This Election Rule Doesn’t Change

You Can Kiss Republicans Goodbye If This Election Rule Doesn't Change

2026 Midterms

Election Laws

Mail-In Voting

Opinion

Supreme Court

Voter Integrity

Virginia&#8217;s most popular Republican is AWOL on the most ludicrous redistricting in the nation.
The Commonwealth of Virginia now stands exactly a month away from an April 21st vote that would approve the most partisan Democrat gerrymander in the nation, and Republicans are nowhere to be found.
Governor Abigail Spanberger (&#8220;Moderate&#8221; &#8211; The Wall Street Journal) rubber stamped the 10-1 redistricting attempt by octogenarian radical leftist Louise Lucas — who actually runs the Richmond legislature — sending a bizarrely shaped map to Virginia voters which amounts to a blatant power grab, allowing for five Democrat majority seats all based within a stone&#8217;s throw of Washington, D.C. to govern the entire state. With zero acknowledgement that Virginia&#8217;s electorate had a Republican governor just months ago, and a 6-5 Democrat majority in the current Congressional representation, it&#8217;s an obscene approach to destroying local representation that short-circuits districts approved by a bipartisan commission on a decade-long basis.
The question on the minds of conservative Virginians through all of this is clear: Where is Glenn Youngkin?
Youngkin, the most popular Republican politician in Virginia, criticized this attempt in its early days. But when Virginians tune in to March Madness, they aren&#8217;t seeing a single ad featuring the former governor. Instead, they&#8217;re barraged with Democrat ads featuring Donald Trump and decrying the current map (where they already have a majority) as racist, unfair, and corrupt.
The deluge is unending, and funded primarily from out of state Democratic entities.
The amount in question is upwards of <a href="https://x.com/apublictrust/status/2031813155807019222">$22 million</a> in ad spending — closer to $30 million according to some consultants — and one of its biggest funders is, you guessed it, George Soros to the tune of <a href="https://x.com/MSchmidtRVA/status/2034295507833454607">$5 million</a>.
By comparison, the Virginia Republican-aligned pushback in defense of the current map is essentially nonexistent. There is no major ad campaign pointing out the false narrative Democrats are advancing. With Youngkin apparently unwilling to expend significant political capital fighting this effort, only former Attorney General Jason Miyares has stepped into the breach — and unlike the former governor, he lacks the donor class connections to bring major resources to the fight.
What&#8217;s particularly maddening for conservatives in the Commonwealth is that even Democrats admit the April referendum is a close-run thing, well within the margin despite their recent sweep of the Old Dominion&#8217;s top three jobs. With a winnable situation sitting right in front of them, though, Republicans seem to be throwing up their hands — or hoping that the Virginia Courts will bail them out and render the map unacceptable. But this question won&#8217;t even be heard <a href="https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/03/virginias-redistricting-referendum-still-sparking-fierce-partisan-debate/">until after the vote</a>.
Glenn Youngkin seems to have a mindset that having had a successful four-year tenure as governor, his time engaged in partisan politics is at a comfortable lull. He&#8217;s happy to wait a couple of years and just run for president if he&#8217;s in the mood. But if this blatantly partisan Democrat redistricting wins in April, Republicans — and not just those in Virginia — should absolutely blame him for the loss, and for the ludicrously skewed gerrymander that will end up with five Democrat Congressmen representing most of the state while comfortably living within driving distance of the best country clubs in Northern Virginia.

Virginia Gubernatorial Candidate Winsome Earle-Sears Closing Campaign Rally

Yes, Virginia, There Is A Glenn Youngkin — He’s Just Not Around To Fight Gerrymanders

Yes, Virginia, There Is A Glenn Youngkin — He's Just Not Around To Fight Gerrymanders

Congress

Democrats

gerrymandering

Glenn Youngkin

Leftists

Virginia

The SAVE America Act cleared a key procedural hurdle Tuesday night, advancing Senate debate after a 51-48 vote.
The proposal, considered the highest legislative priority of President Donald Trump, would require documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote, mandate voter ID for federal elections, and impose new restrictions on voting by mail, with some exceptions.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), a Trump critic who’s not seeking re-election, was not present at the time of the procedural vote, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) voted against it.
“I’m thrilled to announce that just moments ago, we won the vote on the motion to proceed with the House-passed SAVE America Act. We got 51 votes for it,” Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) said in a video.
“Game on, we need to stay on this thing now until it passes, and those who want to filibuster debate, make them speak,” he added.
Debate is expected to stretch on for days as Republicans push for a talking filibuster rather than allowing delays without continuous floor speeches, according to <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5788105-senate-save-america-act-debate/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Hill</a>.
Democrats have vowed unified opposition. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said Tuesday that Democrats will resist the bill “no matter how long it takes.”
“This bill is about stopping groups from voting who tend to vote for Democrats. This is again about rigging the next election,” Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) said on the Senate floor.
Meanwhile, Sen. Eric Schmitt introduced Trump-backed amendments on Tuesday night, including restrictions on transgender-identifying athletes competing in women’s sports and preventing minors from undergoing transgender-related medical procedures.
“The American people want to see a return to common sense, and this week the Senate will vote on the SAVE America Act to deliver on this mandate,” Sen. Eric Schmitt said in a statement.
“I’ve worked closely with President Trump and the White House to introduce a substitute amendment that will save our elections, save women’s sports, and save our children from gender mutilation surgeries. It’s time to get this done,” the Republican added.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), however, is calling for legislation on voter ID, rather than the full scope of unrelated proposals outlined in the SAVE America Act.
“83% of Americans agree on voter ID. 71% of Democrats agree on voter ID. Keep it basic: PHOTO ID to vote,” the moderate Democrat posted to X.
“Stop turning this into a Christmas list and attacking vote-by-mail. If GOP wants real reform over a show vote–put out a clean, standalone bill and I’m AYE,” he continued.

US Capitol building at sunset

Trump’s SAVE America Act Just Cleared A Huge Legislative Hurdle Despite Full Dem Opposition

2026 election

Senate

President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) must &#8220;be a leader&#8221; and take the SAVE American Act across the finish line as Senate Republicans face continued pressure from voters and the White House to pass the voter ID legislation before the midterm elections.
Asked about Thune on Wednesday, Trump made it clear that the SAVE America Act remains the single most important task for the GOP-controlled Senate.
&#8220;He&#8217;s gotta be a leader,&#8221; Trump said of Thune. &#8220;He&#8217;s a leader, he&#8217;s gotta get [the votes].&#8221;
&#8220;It&#8217;s the most popular bill put before Congress,&#8221; he added.
This week, Thune has poured cold water on a Trump-backed proposal to revert to the talking filibuster to pass the SAVE America Act. The talking filibuster would force Democrats who oppose the SAVE America Act to speak nonstop on the Senate floor if they want to block a vote, but according to Thune, a group of Republicans is not on board with changing Senate rules to meet Trump&#8217;s demand.
&#8220;The votes aren’t there, one, to nuke the filibuster, and the votes aren’t there for a talking filibuster,&#8221; Thune told reporters on Tuesday. &#8220;It’s just a reality. I’m the person who has to deliver sometimes the not-so-good news that the math doesn’t add up, but those are the facts, and there’s no getting around it.&#8221;
A <a href="https://x.com/MarkMeadows/status/2031779224470897145">list</a> put together by former White House Chief of Staff and North Carolina Congressman Mark Meadows shows that Senate Republicans are split down the middle on support for the talking filibuster. Senators who have signaled support for using the talking filibuster to pass the SAVE America Act include, Jim Banks (IN), Marsha Blackburn (TN), Ted Budd (NC), Katie Britt (AL), Bill Cassidy (LA), John Cornyn (TX), Ted Cruz (TX), Joni Ernst (IA), Bill Hagerty (TN), Josh Hawley (MO), Ron Johnson (WI), Mike Lee (UT), Cynthia Lummis (WY), Roger Marshall (KS), Dave McCormick (PA), Ashley Moody (FL), Bernie Moreno (OH), Markwayne Mullin (OK), Rand Paul (KY), Jim Risch (ID), Eric Schmitt (MO), Rick Scott (FL), Tim Scott (SC), Tim Sheehy (MT), Dan Sullivan (AK), and Tommy Tuberville (AL).
Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska is the only Republican senator who has publicly opposed the SAVE America Act, and Sen. John Curtis (R-UT) has publicly voiced his opposition to using the talking filibuster. The remaining Republican senators have not said where exactly they stand on the talking filibuster.
Republicans who are wary of using the talking filibuster argue that it would allow Democrats to control the Senate floor and propose an unlimited number of amendments that could be tacked onto the SAVE America Act.
&#8220;I understand everybody feels— they&#8217;re really invested in this, but this particular approach, in terms of the process, is much more complicated and risky than people are assuming at the moment, which is why that the Democrats looked at doing it both under [Chuck] Schumer and [Harry] Reid when they were in the majority, and opted against it,&#8221; Thune told reporters earlier this week.
The SAVE America Act also contains provisions to keep men from competing in women&#8217;s sports and to protect children from gender procedures, key issues for Trump and Republicans.
&#8220;It&#8217;s the most popular bill I think I&#8217;ve ever put before Congress,&#8221; Trump reiterated.
Recent polls show that the vast majority of Americans support voter ID requirements similar to those put forward in the SAVE America Act. While 50 Republican senators have come out in support of the bill, Republicans would need to reach 60 votes to get past the filibuster and move the legislation to a vote. Democrats have remained united in their opposition to the SAVE America Act, effectively tanking the bill&#8217;s chances.
Many Republicans, however, believe they would have a chance to pass the bill if they instituted the talking filibuster, which could wear down Democrats who oppose the Trump-backed legislation. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) told The Daily Wire on Tuesday, &#8220;Voters across the nation are demanding the SAVE America Act. If we need a few more Senators to get on board to beat a Democrat standing filibuster, that’s not a reason to give up — it’s a reason to push even harder.&#8221;
&#8220;If Republicans don’t fight hard to deliver this wildly popular legislation that President Trump has specifically requested, how can we ask Americans to entrust us with both chambers of Congress in the future?&#8221; Lee added.

Donald Trump/John Thune

‘Be A Leader’: Trump Challenges John Thune As Save America Act Faces Uncertainty

Election

John Thune

The SAVE America Act continues to face hurdles toward passage in the Senate.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune cautioned against a “talking filibuster” strategy to get the legislation to the president’s desk, according to <a href="https://punchbowl.news/article/senate/thune-talking-filibuster/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Punchbowl News</a>.
The legislation would require documentary proof of citizenship at the time of voter registration, as well as a valid ID shown at the ballot box. Legislation in the Senate typically needs 60 votes to overcome a filibuster and advance to final passage. There is even some Republican pushback on the proposal, including from Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK).
On Fox News&#8217; “America’s Newsroom” on Wednesday, Thune said that the Republicans will get &#8220;the Democrats on the record&#8221; for the proposal, calling it a &#8220;losing proposition&#8221; for Democrats to go against it, but noted that he would like to see an end to the Department of Homeland Security&#8217;s funding lapse first.
In reference to the talking filibuster, he told reporters on Thursday that &#8220;you&#8217;ve got to have pretty much unanimous support for tabling all amendments. And we&#8217;ve looked at, gamed it out what the first week would look like under a scenario like that, and you&#8217;d be voting on 30 amendments, and I think you&#8217;d probably only have two of the 94 speeches.&#8221;
A source familiar with the process argued that lowering the threshold to 51 votes risks giving Democrats more power, including on issues where a small number of Republicans might cross over, like a three-year extension of expired Affordable Care Act subsidies.
“So the question is, is it a good use of time, and what is the probability of success? And I&#8217;m all for doing things if there&#8217;s a pathway to winning in the end, but I think everybody needs to answer the question, you know, show me, what&#8217;s your picture of victory at the end?” the majority leader added.
The SAVE America Act, sponsored by Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), passed the House earlier this month, and Trump explicitly asked that the bill be passed during his State of the Union address on Tuesday.
“And perhaps most importantly, I’m asking you to approve the SAVE America Act, to stop illegal aliens and others who are unpermitted persons from voting in our sacred American elections,” the president said.
“All voters must show voter ID. All voters must show proof of citizenship in order to vote,” he later added.
Many conservatives in the chamber are strongly pushing for the Senate to pass the bill with the talking filibuster.
“We know there will ‘be a vote.’ But this is guaranteed failure theater at a 60 vote threshold without forcing a real (talking) filibuster…,” Roy posted to X.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), who is also a major proponent of the bill, wants to see it brought up for a vote even though Congress and the White House are still hammering out a Department of Homeland Security funding deal.
“If the Senate isn’t going to remain focused on Homeland Security funding—something I struggle to understand because DHS is nearly two weeks into a shutdown—we should proceed to the SAVE America Act,” Lee posted. “There will be time later to consider other bills. Those who elected us want us to pass the SAVE America Act now!”
Meanwhile, Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) suggested that they should try to get some Democrats on board with the legislation in order to hit the 60-vote threshold.
“We should be locked in on trying to get eight or nine Democrats to vote yes on the SAVE Act,” the Republican said, according to <a href="https://www.semafor.com/article/02/26/2026/republican-floats-working-with-democrats-on-voter-id-bill" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Semafor</a>. “That’s the most plausible route to success.”
Most Democrats have been extremely opposed to the proposals outlined in the legislation, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer equating it to “Jim Crow 2.0.”
During a Senate floor speech earlier this month, Schumer said that “millions of American citizens—millions—don’t have access to the paperwork that SAVE would require and would be in danger of getting shut out of our democracy.”
“For example, if you’re one of the 50% of Americans who doesn’t have a passport, or if you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans who can’t quickly access your birth certificate, the SAVE Act could, in effect, take away your right to vote,” the New York senator added.

President Trump Presents The Mexican Border Defense Medal At The White House

Trump Demanded Proof Of Citizenship At The Booth — Now The GOP-Led Senate Faces A Choice

SAVE America Act Faces Uphill Battle In The Senate

A new poll conducted in five battleground states finds majority support for requiring proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections, a key provision of the SAVE America Act.
The survey, commissioned by Heritage Action, polled Republican, Democrat, and independent voters in Alaska, Georgia, Maine, Ohio, and North Carolina. The legislation passed the House with widespread Republican support and one Democrat voting in favor, and now faces a tougher path in the Senate, where it must clear the 60-vote filibuster threshold.
Sixty-nine percent of likely voters in Alaska and Georgia support “requiring proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections,” along with 71% in Ohio, 68% in North Carolina, and 65% in Maine, according to the poll.
When respondents were told the SAVE America Act would require proof of citizenship and a “valid ID” to vote in federal elections, support remained above 60% in all five states: 67% in North Carolina, 65% in Georgia, 64% in Alaska, 63% in Maine, and 62% in Ohio.
Opposition was highest in Maine at 26%. In each of the five states, 16% or fewer respondents said they were unsure or had no opinion.
The poll also found strong opposition to noncitizen voting. Seventy-seven percent of Alaskans, 73% of Mainers, 71% of North Carolinians, 69% of Ohioans, and 67% of Georgians said they oppose allowing noncitizens to vote in U.S. elections.
The survey included 11 questions related to the SAVE America Act and election administration policies. After being presented with additional information about the legislation, a majority of those polled said they would “be more likely to support re-election of your U.S. Senators if they voted in favor of the SAVE America Act.”
Stefani Buhajla, senior director of communications and marketing at Heritage Action, argued that the poll shows broad support for the legislation.
“The electorate is not divided,&#8221; she said. &#8220;More than 70 percent of likely voters oppose non-citizen voting.&#8221;
She added that voters were more likely to reward senators for supporting the bill than to punish them for backing it, and urged opponents to block the measure &#8220;in full public view&#8221; rather than resort to procedural maneuvers.
Each of the five states features a competitive Senate race in November. The Cook Political Report ranks the races in Georgia, Maine, and North Carolina as toss-ups, while Alaska and Ohio’s contests as &#8220;Lean Republican.&#8221;
Many Democrats have opposed the SAVE America Act, arguing that requiring documentary proof of citizenship could make it more difficult for some eligible Americans to vote.
“The SAVE America Act would radically upend voter registration nationwide by requiring Americans to present documentary proof of citizenship, such as a passport or birth certificate, in person for every new registration or update. Driver’s licenses, including REAL IDs, and military or tribal IDs alone would not suffice,” a group of Democrat attorneys general, including New York Attorney General Leticia James, wrote in a <a href="https://oag.maryland.gov/News/Documents/pdfs/AG%20Letter%20-%20SAVE%20America%20Act.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">letter</a> last week to Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).
“This legislation shifts the burden of verifying eligibility away from government systems and onto individual citizens, forcing millions to prove their right to vote before being allowed to participate in our democracy,” the attorneys general wrote, adding that “instances of noncitizen voting are exceedingly rare and have never been shown to affect election outcomes.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson speaks, with Rep. Chip Roy in the background

What Battleground Voters Really Think About Election Integrity

The following is an edited transcript excerpt from &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1910-breaking-trans-school-shooter-murders-nine-in-canada?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">The Michael Knowles Show</a>.&#8221;
* * *
In the last couple of days, the media has been forced to acknowledge reality on multiple fronts, beginning with one of the most controversial bills going through Congress right now. Senator Mike Lee, a great Republican senator, is the champion behind the bill and it’s called the SAVE Act.
What is the SAVE Act? It&#8217;s the Safeguard American Voting Eligibility Act, which says you need to prove that you&#8217;re eligible to vote if you want to vote. 
Simple, right? This should easily pass.
Not only can they not get the Democrats to vote for it — because Democrats want the illegals to vote so that they can rig elections and steal votes from the American people — apparently, the Republicans can&#8217;t even get the Republicans to vote for this. Senate Majority Leader John Thune says there aren&#8217;t anywhere close to the votes to nuking the filibuster, which would be required to get the SAVE Act through. So, although that idea continues to be put out there, it doesn&#8217;t have a future.
Making Americans submit ID in order to vote — safeguarding American elections in the most basic way — doesn&#8217;t have a future, not just because of Democrats who obviously don&#8217;t want to secure our elections, but because of Republicans.
So, you might say, well, some of these senators, you know, they&#8217;re representing whole states and some of those states are kind of purple. You know, maybe this is really a controversial issue. You know, the Democrats hate voter ID and maybe it&#8217;s controversial among Republicans.
Thank you Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.
Here’s what CNN has to say about the issue:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Voter ID is overwhelmingly popular with everyone except Democrat politicians.
CNN: &#8220;The bottom line is this: Voter ID is not controversial in this country&#8230; it is not controversial by party and it is not controversial by race.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/XYzmcnTw1s">pic.twitter.com/XYzmcnTw1s</a>
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) <a href="https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/2021289992971055217?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 10, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @RNCResearch/X.com
<blockquote>What&#8217;s the racial breakdown on this? Because I think a lot of people make the argument that people of color, nonwhite Americans, have a harder time procuring a photo ID to vote. But even here, take a look here. Favor photo ID to vote: 85% of white people favor it, 82% of Latino voters, 76% of Black Americans favor it. So the bottom line is this: voter ID is not controversial in this country. A photo ID to vote is not controversial in this country. It is not controversial by party, and it is not controversial by race. The vast majority of Americans agree with Nicki Minaj that, in fact, you should have a photo ID to be able to vote.</blockquote>
Not controversial in the least.
I was surprised by these racial polls — and actually by the partisan poll too. Basically every Republican supports voter ID, but even 71% of Democrats favor voter ID. Yet zero percent of Democrats who are in elected office support voter ID.
You have 76% of Black people — this is the most reliably Democrat racial group, the group that we are told is specifically being disenfranchised by voter ID — more than three quarters of them support voter ID.
When you look at Latinos, it&#8217;s even higher: 82%. We&#8217;re told Latinos are being discriminated against, it&#8217;s hard for them to get ID.
And white people are close to the Latinos at 85%.
Everybody supports voter ID except for elected Democrats, none of whom support voter ID. Why? Because they are trying to steal elections. This isn&#8217;t tinfoil hat stuff. This is the only way to explain the discrepancy between elected Democrats — politicians, operatives, activists — and ordinary voters. Basically everyone in the country supports voter ID. The only people who don&#8217;t are the ones who particularly work to run and win elections.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1910-breaking-trans-school-shooter-murders-nine-in-canada?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">WATCH: The Michael Knowles Show on DailyWire+</a></h3>
What you&#8217;re going to hear from the establishment media is, well, actually, you know, it&#8217;s very rare for illegal aliens to vote in elections. It&#8217;s very rare for people who are ineligible to vote in elections.
Right. Sure. Okay. 
The libs have told you a lot of lies over the years, and I&#8217;m not going to go through the litany of them now but I just want to take you back a few months.
Do you remember when the Democrats shut the government down? The Democrats shut the government down because they wanted to try to juice their numbers before some special elections. And the Republicans came out and said you&#8217;re shutting the government down in order to give health care to illegal aliens.
And the Democrats uniformly said, no, we are not. We do not give health care to illegal aliens. That is not true. That&#8217;s a lie.
By the end of the shutdown, the Democrats were inveighing against the Republicans because they said this is so awful — illegal aliens can&#8217;t get food, they&#8217;re losing their health care, they&#8217;re losing their SNAP benefits. They completely contradicted themselves over the course of weeks. Not years, not even months but weeks. They told you illegal aliens don&#8217;t get health care and welfare, and then they told you we have to reopen the government so that illegal aliens can get health care and welfare again.
The Democrats tell you that illegal aliens are not voting, but they are fighting tooth and nail against the vast majority of their own voters to prevent voter ID. Why? I think it might have something to do with the fact that illegal aliens are voting. The Democrats are counting on illegal aliens to vote. Even beyond illegal aliens, there are plenty of other ineligible voters who are not illegal aliens — voters who maybe are bussed in from out of district, voters who maybe because of felonies or other issues are not allowed to vote. Regardless, they need to minimize ballot security measures.
The only explanation—the only explanation—for the Democrats to fight against their own voters on this issue is that they want to steal elections. If you don&#8217;t get that at this point, I don&#8217;t know how to help you.

Americans Go To The Polls In The 2024 Elections

CNN Polling Cuts Against A Key Democrat Narrative

Election Fraud

Michael Knowles

Republicans

Voter ID

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon <a href="https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/2005984028349129011">announced</a> Monday that the Department of Justice had launched 23 lawsuits against 22 states that have not complied with federal voter roll verification requirements.
In mid-September, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-oregon-and-maine-failure-provide-voter-registration-rolls">sued</a> the states of Oregon and Maine and their respective Secretaries of State for failing to provide information on voter list maintenance procedures and electronic copies of statewide voter registration lists. “States simply cannot pick and choose which federal laws they will comply with, including our voting laws, which ensure that all American citizens have equal access to the ballot in federal elections,” Dhillon said.
“American citizens have a right to feel confident in the integrity of our electoral process,” Dhillon said, “and the refusal of certain states to protect their citizens against vote dilution will result in legal consequences.” Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows <a href="https://www.themainewire.com/2025/09/shenna-bellows-responds-to-dojs-lawsuit-over-her-refusal-to-turn-over-election-data/?utm_source=chatgpt.com">responded</a> to the lawsuit by declaring, “Go jump in the Gulf of Maine.”
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible c-link--underline" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" data-sk="tooltip_parent">Christmas Sale – Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
In late September, the Trump administration filed a lawsuit against six more states after the DOJ accused them of failing to comply with federal law by refusing to turn over voter registration records. The states included California, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, and Pennsylvania.
“A few months ago I started this process of requesting the voter rolls from all the states and territories in the United States and asked them to share them with us so that we can help these states compare voter rolls against our government data and clean their voter rolls as the requirement states under federal law the Help America Vote Act, amongst others,” Dhillon stated on The Charlie Kirk Show on Monday.
“So there’s a lot of hemming and hawing, including from red states, a lot of back-and-forth, and then some outright refusal to cooperate from many states; and so I am proud to report that today I’m in litigation with twenty-two states in the United States; that’s actually twenty-three lawsuits, since California has two lawsuits,” she continued. “I also have voluntary compliance from thirteen states, including Texas and several others. And even on Christmas Eve, I had secretaries of state uploading their data to the DOJ so that we could do our work on it and help them clean their voter rolls.”

Justice Department Holds Press Conference On Complaint Filed Under FACE Act

DOJ Sues 22 States To Force Voter Roll Checks

Harmeet Dhillon

The Trump administration on Tuesday took action against six blue states that it says have failed to comply with requests to produce their voter rolls. 
The Justice Department <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-six-additional-states-failure-provide-voter-registration-rolls">announced</a> suits against Delaware, Maryland, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington for not producing statewide registration lists. Without these lists, the Justice Department said that they cannot certify that the states are maintaining an accurate count of eligible voters. 
&#8220;Accurate voter rolls are the cornerstone of fair and free elections, and too many states have fallen into a pattern of noncompliance with basic voter roll maintenance,&#8221; said Attorney General Pam Bondi. &#8220;The Department of Justice will continue filing proactive election integrity litigation until states comply with basic election safeguards.&#8221;
The suits come amid a push from Republicans nationwide to crack down on non-citizen voting and maintain clean voter registration lists.
The lawsuits say that the states are not acting in accordance with the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act, which compel states to maintain accurate voter lists. The attorney general is empowered to enforce those laws and has a right to access the lists under the Civil Rights Act of 1960, the suits say.
&#8220;States that continue to defy federal voting laws interfere with our mission of ensuring that Americans have accurate voter lists as they go to the polls, that every vote counts equally, and that all voters have confidence in election results. At this Department of Justice, we will not stand for this open defiance of federal civil rights laws,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon.
The <a href="https://www.justice.gov/crt/media/1419811/dl?utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=govdelivery">lawsuit</a> against Rhode Island says that on September 16 Rhode Island sent a letter to the Justice Department refusing a September 8 request for voter roll information. The letter said that the states “objects to providing” the requested information, according to the suit. This requested information includes driver license information and the last four digits of Social Security numbers used to register for voting. 
50% off DailyWire+ annual memberships will not return for another year, so don’t miss this deal! Join now at <a class="c-link" href="http://dailywire.com/cyberweek" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="http://DailyWire.com/cyberweek" data-sk="tooltip_parent">DailyWire.com/cyberweek</a>.
Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha claimed the suit was an example of Trump weaponizing the Justice Department. 
“We stand with and will defend the secretary, and win, because lawsuits concerning lawful conduct are largely unsuccessful,” he said. “But I’m not surprised that this administration is confused about what it means to behave lawfully.”
In September, the Justice Department <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/justice-dept-sues-six-states-for-refusing-to-hand-over-key-voter-data">announced</a> suits against Michigan, California, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Minnesota, and New York over the same issue.

Justice Department Announces Federal Enforcement Action Against International Criminal Organization

Menu