Republican politicians and conservative leaders are turning up the pressure on Senate GOP leadership to pass the SAVE America Act to strengthen election integrity.  President Donald Trump posted Thursday on Truth Social, imploring senators to move quickly on the measure.  “The Republicans MUST DO, with PASSION, and at the expense of everything else, THE SAVE AMERICA ACT,” Trump wrote. “And not the watered down version. This is a Country Defining fight for the Soul of our Nation!”  This legislation requires individuals to provide documented proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote, show a photo ID to vote in federal elections, and tightens absentee ballot rules.  A new Harvard CAPS/Harris poll released this week put support for the SAVE America Act at 71%—with Democrats at 50% approval, Republicans at 91%, and independents at 69%.  Harvard/Harris poll finds overwhelming support for the SAVE America Act, including Dems split evenly and a landslide among independents: pic.twitter.com/kkzA5jE6YU— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) March 4, 2026 The House passed the SAVE America Act on Feb. 11, and it has stalled in the Senate since then. Republicans need 60 votes to stop Democrats from blocking the bill, and some GOP lawmakers want their leadership to force a “talking filibuster.”  Tiffany Justice, Heritage Action executive vice president, commended Trump for his urgency.   “During his State of the Union address, President Trump devoted a full three minutes to the SAVE America Act, calling on the Senate to immediately bring it to the floor and forcing any opposition into full public view,.” Justice said.  Zack Smith, a senior legal fellow and manager of the Supreme Court and Appellate Advocacy Program at The Heritage Foundation, said, “It seems like those who are opposed to it are putting ideology, partisan political purposes over making sure that we have safe and secure elections, which, by the way, benefits all Americans.”  Lawmakers Speak Out  Several GOP senators and representatives have taken to social media to voice support for the SAVE America Act, with the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, frequently posting updates   “When someone who is not an American citizen casts a vote in our country, it’s taking away the power of YOUR vote,” Lee wrote.  When someone who is not an American citizen casts a vote in our country, it’s taking away the power of YOUR vote. It’s taking something that doesn’t belong to them. Something that belongs to you. Pass the SAVE America Act. pic.twitter.com/ITWbQ33SDp— Mike Lee (@SenMikeLee) March 3, 2026 House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R?La., said that the American people support this legislation: “Protect the vote. Require ID. Verify citizenship.”  The American people agree.Protect the vote. Require ID. Verify citizenship.That’s the SAVE America Act. pic.twitter.com/n7YmnsY2pl— Steve Scalise (@SteveScalise) February 6, 2026 Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., promoted the bill, saying citizens on both sides of the aisle “want to make sure their elections are secure.”  ? Government exists to serve WE THE PEOPLE, not the Washington Swamp. Millions of Americans support the SAVE America Act. It’s time to pass it and SECURE OUR ELECTIONS NOW! ?? pic.twitter.com/Kzvl59l3d2— Rick Scott (@SenRickScott) March 4, 2026 Supporters emphasize that requiring voter ID and proof of citizenship is a way to secure elections and restore public confidence.  Pushback and Criticism  Opponents of the bill argue that it may not prevent illegal voting but could create barriers for eligible voters.  Rick Hasen, a law professor at UCLA, told The Daily Signal, “We know from the experience of Kansas in the last decade that documentary proof of citizenship requirements to register to vote, as in the SAVE Act, disenfranchise thousands of voters but prevent virtually no illegal voting by noncitizens.”   He added, “Such laws are far more consequential than state laws requiring voter identification to be shown at polling places.”  Former President Barack Obama accused Republicans of trying to pass a bill that would “disenfranchise millions of Americans.”  Republicans are still trying to pass the SAVE Act—a bill that would make it harder to vote and disenfranchise millions of Americans. Join @RedistrictAct and tell your member of Congress to vote no: https://t.co/Cc4JHKr73Q pic.twitter.com/tUyxEbYJ0y— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) February 11, 2026 As the SAVE America Act awaits action in the Senate, the debate over election integrity appears only likely to intensify, with both sides recognizing the importance of the issue before November’s elections.   The post Trump Ramps Up Pressure as SAVE America Act Stalls in the Senate appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Three Department of Homeland Security officials expressed optimism after President Donald Trump announced he is appointing Sen. Markwayne Mullin to lead the agency while reassigning Kristi Noem to a new position. “I think there was kind of a sense of relief, and I think optimism,” an agency official told The Daily Signal. “I mean, I think there’s still a lot more that DHS can do in this administration, and I think Sen. Mullin, you know, he’s going to bring a fresh perspective, fresh change, and get us back on track and not have so much drama and distractions that get in the way of the president’s agenda.” Another DHS official said he was “looking forward to seeing how Sen. Mullin leads the agency.” “I’m very optimistic,” he added. Trump on Thursday thanked Noem for her service to the “Homeland” and announced her appointment “to be Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas, our new Security Initiative in the Western Hemisphere,” in a post on Truth Social. Another DHS official told The Daily Signal the move could result in a more unified agency. “I think this is a great relief that, you know, maybe there’s a chance to have one unified team at DHS working on these really high-priority presidential missions,” the official said. Noem faced scrutiny and criticism in recent weeks following two fatal shootings of protesters by immigration enforcement agents in Minneapolis. Noem justified the shootings by calling protesters’ actions “domestic terrorism,” a characterization that drew widespread backlash. Both shooting incidents are under investigation. Trump’s announcement also follows a report from National Review’s Audrey Fahlberg that Trump was “furious” with Noem following her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. During the hearing, Noem said Trump had approved a $220 million ad campaign featuring her that encouraged illegal aliens to self-deport. Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., pressed Noem on the ads while she was under oath, asking: “The president approved ahead of time you spending $220 million running TV ads across the country in which you are featured prominently?” “Yes,” Noem answered. While Noem said Trump knew about the ads, the president later told Reuters he “never knew anything about it.” One DHS official criticized Noem’s “tactics” as secretary as “loud and noisy,” referencing a video posted on social media last year in which Noem sported an AR-15 and a tactical vest while discussing arrests of illegal aliens. However, the official also said that Noem “was a good spokesperson some of the time, and she was a Trump defender,” adding, “I think that the job that they gave her actually sounds really good for her.” Trump previewed a Saturday announcement of the new security Initiative, where he is expected to provide more details about Noem’s role. “The Western Hemisphere is absolutely critical for U.S. security,” Noem wrote on X Thursday. “In this new role, I will be able to build on the partnerships and national security expertise I forged over the last 13 months as Secretary of Homeland Security.” Noem has had a “historic tenure” during her time as secretary, a source at DHS told The Daily Signal, adding that under her leadership, the agency has “gone on the offensive” to deliver the “most secure border ever, massive amounts of drug seizures, and stopping that from pouring into our country.” More than 2 million illegal aliens self-deported during Noem’s tenure, according to the department, and about 670,000 illegal immigrants were removed from the United States. Noem has done “such a tremendous job,” the DHS source said, noting that the “mission” of her new role is a continuation of her work and “represents the same ultimate goal: safer communities.” The post DHS Officials React to Trump Replacing Noem appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Under President Joe Biden, the federal government spent millions pushing what critics call a negative narrative about America in the museums meant to celebrate and commemorate the country’s history. Now, the Trump administration has reversed course, using the same agency to celebrate America’s 250th anniversary. The Institute of Museum and Library Services now supports “Freedom Trucks,” mobile museums that tell the story of the Declaration of Independence, the Revolutionary War, and the Constitution. Marissa Streit, president of the education institution PragerU, told The Daily Signal how a veteran reacted when he saw one of these museums. “I honestly just feel relieved,” she recalled the veteran saying. “I lost friends defending this country. I sacrificed defending my great country, and what do I come back to? An education system that is teaching my kids that everything I sacrificed was not worth it because this country is bad, this country is racist.” “What a disgrace it is that these museums make veterans feel what they’ve done for our country was in vain,” Streit said. President Donald Trump attempted to shut down the institute and halt many of its grants, but a federal judge blocked his efforts in November. Now, the agency has applied new standards, seeking applications for projects that foster “a greater appreciation” of America “through uplifting and positive narratives of our shared American experience.” “President Trump is committed to ending—once and for all—the extremist attempts to rewrite American history that sow division and undermine the moral legitimacy of our founding principles,” IMLS spokesman Rick Manning told The Daily Signal. He cited Trump’s executive order on “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” noting that it directs the agency to “not only reject historical revisionism” but also to “tell the true story of how America came to be the greatest nation in the world.” He said the new institute aims to spark “a renaissance of patriotism, intellectual rigor, and innovation in our cultural institutions.” Freedom Truck image (Tyler O’Neil/The Daily Signal) What Biden’s IMLS Funded Under Biden, the institute funded “woke” causes that often present American history in what critics consider far too negative a light. In September 2021, IMLS awarded $170,590 to Historic Hudson Valley for a “library” of “classroom engagement strategies … for teaching about slavery.” The grant involved a “partnership with the Hard History Project,” a now-defunct initiative that IMLS described as “a spinoff of [the Southern Poverty Law Center’s] Teaching Tolerance’s Teaching Hard History Initiative.” When Hard History Project head Kate Shuster recruited teachers, she described herself as the “long-time manager of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Teaching Hard History Initiative.” SPLC, a left-leaning activist group best known for putting mainstream conservative and Christian organizations on a “hate map” with Ku Klux Klan chapters, changed the name of its education program from “Teaching Tolerance” to “Learning for Justice” in 2021. The program makes no bones about promoting critical race theory. Critical race theory teaches that America is systemically or institutionally racist, despite the progress of civil rights laws, and trains students to see racism everywhere. This theory rests behind claims that America needs an “antiracist” movement to fundamentally reshape institutions. In September 2024, IMLS awarded another $249,906 to the Woodland Park Zoological Society in Washington state. The grant states that the zoo will create a program “to apply equity, inclusion, and antiracist practices to zoo structures, policies, and programs.” The program will enable about 28 “project managers” to “apply an antiracist lens to the zoo’s work.” Also in September 2024, IMLS awarded $249,992 to the Montpelier Foundation, which runs President James Madison’s home in Virginia. The Montpelier Foundation uses SPLC materials to emphasize slavery. The grant states that Montpelier will create a “new interpretive plan for the site,” engaging in “truth-telling about slavery’s role in the shaping of the United States, the legacy it continues to have on race relations in America, and the lingering institutional disparities that prevent Americans from realizing the ideals expressed in our founding documents.” The IMLS also awarded $49,315 to the New York-based Pratt Institute’s graduate program for library, archive, and museum professionals. The November 2021 grant backs the institute’s partnership with LGBTQ+ activist groups to provide paid internships to “better serve diverse communities and collections including BIPOC and LGBTQ+ communities in NYC.” (BIPOC stands for black, Indigenous, and people of color, and it represents an umbrella term for the people critical race theory intends to help.) Other grants also focused on promoting people on the basis of skin color, sexual orientation, or other characteristics the Left claims are “underrepresented” or disadvantaged. IMLS awarded the Association of Art Museum Curators $158,831 to “support two cohorts of early career curators from underrepresented backgrounds” in September 2023. The agency awarded $250,000 to the Heckscher Museum in New York for “educational programming showcasing major works by LGBTQ+ artists” in September 2024. It dedicated $740,320 for the American Association of Museums in September 2022 to “embed the principles of diversity, equity, accessibility, and inclusion into its fieldwide assessment and accreditation programs,” aiming to “embed DEAI fundamentals at a structural level.” Trump’s Changes While a judge blocked Trump’s order to eliminate many IMLS functions and grants, Keith Sonderling, deputy secretary at the Department of Labor, is directing the agency to carry out Trump’s policy goals. The agency retained enough career civil servants to carry out core functions. Last year, IMLS awarded $10 million to the National Park Foundation for Freedom 250, which created the six Freedom Truck mobile museums. The museums are touring the country to celebrate the 250th anniversary. Freedom Truck Image (Tyler O’Neil/The Daily Signal) Two conservative organizations, PragerU and Hillsdale College, advised Freedom 250 in developing the museums, but neither organization took any federal funding. “Our policy is we won’t take any money from the government,” PragerU’s Streit told The Daily Signal. Hillsdale also confirmed that it did not receive any funding. While the Freedom Trucks do not promote critical race theory, they do not shy away from mentioning slavery or highlighting how former slaves contributed to the patriot cause. Freedom Truck Image (Tyler O’Neil/The Daily Signal) The trucks also feature a “Wall of American Heroes,” which highlights black icons such as Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglass, Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, and Jackie Robinson, alongside military figures like George S. Patton, Christian leaders like evangelist Billy Graham and Bishop Fulton Sheen, inventors like Alexander Graham Bell and Thomas Edison, and actors such as Frank Sinatra, Jimmy Stewart, and John Wayne. The post UN-WOKE: How the Trump Admin Is Reversing the Demonization of American History on the 250th Anniversary appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Far too many so-called protesters these days aren’t simply expressing their First Amendment rights, they are using public coercion to harass, intimidate, and physically threaten people into accepting their views. Several states are taking measures to clamp down on the rise of what one writer calls “civil terrorism,” essentially organized and often violent mayhem practiced by groups like Antifa and other anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement groups. These are small, but important steps to ensure that America does not descend wholly into mob rule. The most recent states aiming to curb civil terrorism are Utah and Arizona, where legislation is coming down the pipeline to increase penalties for crimes committed during essentially unlawful street “protests.” The Utah bill HB 311 “amends the offense of aggravated disorderly conduct on a street or highway to include obstructing any street or highway if the actor does so in concert with two or more individuals” and creates the “offense of intentional concealment of identity while committing an offense in public.” So, it’s targeting mobs blocking traffic and people wearing masks while committing crimes. The Arizona bill is similar. It aims to punish, according to the Arizona Capitol Times, people “who block traffic in protest, trespass in a building, or commit other minor crimes.” These individuals could face jail time and other more severe penalties for actions that are already essentially crimes. The Arizona law was reportedly written in collaboration with Manhattan Institute legal analyst Tal Fortgang, who recently wrote an excellent piece in City Journal defending the laws. He wrote that not only are increasing penalties vital to protecting law-abiding Americans from civil terrorists, but he also noted that the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups are wrong to say these laws abridge free speech rights. “These criticisms make no sense because the actions in question are already illegal.=,” Fortgang wrote Wednesday. “The First Amendment has never protected blocking traffic without a permit—as civil rights marchers who were willing to pay the price understood well.” And as Fortgang noted, even the Arizona ACLU wrote in a section on its website about knowing “your rights” that protesters shouldn’t “obstruct car or pedestrian traffic.” “Nothing new is being criminalized,” Fortgang wrote. “There is a spectrum of protest, ranging from minimally disruptive—one person venturing onto a highway—to maximally disruptive, as in dozens of demonstrators refusing to disperse, sometimes while brandishing paraphernalia indicating support for designated foreign terrorist organizations. Updating the law to reflect this reality has no bearing on lawful protest.” These proposed laws are generally a step in the right direction. What we’ve seen in recent years is that the left-wing groups, more properly defined as agitators than protesters, have routinely stretched and broken the law to ensure that their fellow Americans are cowed into silence about this issue or that. Whether it’s climate change, or Palestinians, or ICE, or whatever, they have pushed their activities beyond protest and into action that violates the rights of others. These aren’t “mostly peaceful protests,” they are hostile acts of people who, in many cases, violated the rights of fellow Americans. The federal government and many red-leaning states have already taken steps to curb this sort of behavior that has occasionally led to deadly confrontations between activists and law enforcement officials. For instance, Florida passed the Combating Public Disorder Act in 2021, which included harsher penalties for “violent and disorderly assemblies.” After initially being contested in the courts, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the law and simply clarified that it would only apply to people committing violence or “disorderly conduct.” The issue will remain more difficult to address in blue states and blue districts where professional agitators routinely engage in unlawful assembly and acts of violence and typically receive only the lightest punishments. Take, for instance, the pro-Palestinian violent agitators who took over a building at Columbia University in New York City last April. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg dropped the charges for many because he said that those who broke into the building were wearing masks, and it was difficult to identify them. And on Tuesday, a state judge vacated punishments for 22 students and former students involved in the occupation of Hamilton Hall. So, what kind of deterrent is there for violent activists to not take illegal actions again when they are given, at most, a slap on the wrist? The answer is that there is no deterrent. The political powers that be decided that some people have more rights than others based on the causes they champion. And that’s why additional state law is necessary to ensure that violent fanatics must think twice before breaking the law and terrorizing their fellow citizens over their cause of the day. Antifa, Violence, and Threats: The Fuel Behind The Daily Signal's 'Common Sense' MissionThe increase in violent threats against conservatives—and even members of The Daily Signal—only motivates @RobertBluey and his team to defend conservative values even more through their… pic.twitter.com/Etst5520VO— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) February 6, 2026 In far too many cases, innocent Americans have been hurt and even killed by radical activists who’ve decided to invoke the heckler’s and even assassin’s veto. Increased penalties will, at the very least, clamp down on some of this behavior. The post More States Need to Crack Down on ‘Civil Terrorism’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

As House Democrats refuse to vote in favor of funding for the Department of Homeland Security, all but four House Democrats voted for a resolution that aims to counter President Donald Trump’s military campaign against Iran. The “war powers” concurrent resolution failed by just 7 votes on Thursday afternoon, with 210 House Democrats and two Republicans voting in favor of the attempt to restrain the president. While most House Democrats seek to constrain the president’s military action abroad, 212 voted against providing funding for the Department of Homeland Security amidst ongoing security concerns in wake of the campaign against Iran. “They don’t care about defending this country, they are driven by hatred of Donald Trump, and that’s a dangerous approach, especially when under heightened security.” House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., told The Daily Signal. “They should put their country first, and they don’t.” War Powers Resolution Bombs The House voted down the war powers resolution 219 to 212 on Thursday. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, were the only Republicans to vote against the Iran operation. The resolution would have passed if not for four Democrats siding with Republicans. Democrat Reps. Henry Cuellar of Texas, Jared Golden of Maine, Greg Landsman of Ohio, and Juan Vargas of California voted against the resolution. Massie introduced the legislation in June of 2025 after Trump struck Iran nuclear facilities in Operation Midnight Hammer. Rep. Rho Kanna, D-Calif., has helped Massie gather support for the resolution in the lower chamber. “Our troops deserve a clear mission, so when it’s done, they can come home. No more forever wars,” Massie told The Daily Signal on Thursday. Massie’s resolution, however, is a concurrent resolution, a non-binding measure that does not have the force of law and does not require the president’s signature. “Congress has the sole power to declare war under article 1, section 8, clause 11 of the United States Constitution,” the largely symbolic measure reads. “Congress has not declared war with respect to, or provided a specific statutory authorization for, hostilities involving United States Armed Forces against the Islamic Republic of Iran.” While the resolution does not carry force, it “directs the President to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran.” Despite voting in favor of limiting Trump’s military use, Democrats have been accused by Republicans of playing a “political exercise” by not introducing the resolution under previous war time presidents. Democrats Oppose DHS Funding While DHS remains shut down due to a lapse in appropriations, a House bill to fund DHS funding passed 221 to 209 on Thursday afternoon, with four Democrats voting in favor with House Republicans. Cuellar and Golden also voted to restore DHS funding. Democrat Reps. Don Davis of North Carolina and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington also voted in favor. DHS has been shut down since Feb. 14 as Democrat leaders demand large-scale reforms to Immigrations and Customs Enforcement before voting in favor of DHS funding. “Democrats prove, yet again, that they do not care about protecting their own homeland, their families, their neighbors, and all of America,” Rep. Mark Harris, R-N.C., told The Daily Signal. “Democrats proved they are willing to protect illegal aliens over American citizens,” Harris added. “You would think the tragedy that occurred in Austin, Texas would open their eyes to the fact that we need fully funded law enforcement to keep our country safe.” In the wake of Operation Epic Fury against Iran, 53-year-old Ndiaga Diagne, a legal immigrant from Senegal, opened fire at an Austin-area bar, killing three and injured over a dozen over the weekend. Investigators are looking into terrorism and the hostilities against Iran as possible motivation. Republicans are concerned more incidents like this could occur. “We’ve got a lot of terrorists in our country,” Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, recently told The Daily Signal. “We know we have we know they’re here. These guys that get a wild hair, they’re dangerous, and they kill people.” When asked by The Daily Signal if she is worried more Austin style shootings will emerge, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., said she is “concerned about going to war with Iran.” The post How Many House Democrats Just Voted Against DHS Funding and Iran Operation? appeared first on The Daily Signal.