Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
LetMyPeopleVote
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
February 13, 2026
https://www.ms.now/news/don-lemon-pleads-not-guilty-in-first-amendment-case-in-minnesota
Don Lemon pleads not guilty in First Amendment case in Minnesota
The former CNN anchor is facing federal civil rights charges related to his presence at a protest that disrupted a church service in St. Paul last month.
BREAKING: Don Lemon pleads not guilty in First Amendment case in Minnesota
— MS NOW (@ms.now) 2026-02-13T19:20:02.649Z
READ MORE: www.ms.now/news/don-lem...
https://www.ms.now/news/don-lemon-pleads-not-guilty-in-first-amendment-case-in-minnesota
Journalist Don Lemon pleaded not guilty Friday in federal court in Minnesota to charges stemming from his presence at a church protest against the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
Lemon was arrested in Los Angeles in January after a federal grand jury indicted the former CNN anchor and several others at the demonstration, which disrupted a service at Cities Church in St. Paul.
They face felony charges of conspiring to violate religious freedoms at a house of worship and injuring, intimidating and interfering with the exercise of religious freedoms at a place of worship.
Lemon and his legal team have maintained that he was at the event solely in his role as a journalist, livestreaming the protest and interviewing participants.
He appeared alongside four other defendants, including civil rights attorney Nekima Levy Armstrong, who were all indicted in connection with the incident. Prosecutors say the group’s actions interrupted a church service and intimidated congregants.
Lemon was arrested in Los Angeles in January after a federal grand jury indicted the former CNN anchor and several others at the demonstration, which disrupted a service at Cities Church in St. Paul.
They face felony charges of conspiring to violate religious freedoms at a house of worship and injuring, intimidating and interfering with the exercise of religious freedoms at a place of worship.
Lemon and his legal team have maintained that he was at the event solely in his role as a journalist, livestreaming the protest and interviewing participants.
He appeared alongside four other defendants, including civil rights attorney Nekima Levy Armstrong, who were all indicted in connection with the incident. Prosecutors say the group’s actions interrupted a church service and intimidated congregants.
February 13, 2026
https://www.ms.now/news/ex-fbi-official-slams-kash-patel-inappropriate-behavior-nancy-guthrie
Ex-FBI official slams Kash Patel's 'inappropriate' behavior in Nancy Guthrie investigation
“He’s going back to the one skill that he thinks he has, which is self-promoting,” a former senior executive at the FBI’s counterterrorism division told MS NOW.
Ex-FBI official slams Kash Patel’s ‘inappropriate’ behavior in Nancy Guthrie investigation
— Lauren Ashley Davis (@laurenmeidasa.bsky.social) 2026-02-13T15:56:26.928Z
“He’s going back to the one skill that he thinks he has, which is self-promoting,†a former senior executive at the FBI’s counterterrorism division told MS NOW.
www.ms.now/news/ex-fbi-...
https://www.ms.now/news/ex-fbi-official-slams-kash-patel-inappropriate-behavior-nancy-guthrie
FBI Director Kash Patel is getting heat from a former bureau official for his handling of the investigation into the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, the mother of “Today” show co-host Savannah Guthrie.
During a Tuesday appearance on Fox News, Patel told host Sean Hannity that “substantial progress” had been made in the probe and authorities had identified “persons of interest” in connection with the 84-year-old’s apparent abduction.
However, shortly after his interview, a man detained by authorities for questioning over Guthrie’s disappearance was released from custody.
On Wednesday’s “All In with Chris Hayes,” MS NOW national security intelligence analyst Christopher O’Leary, who served as a senior executive at the FBI’s counterterrorism division, called Patel’s comments on the investigation “incredibly inappropriate.”
“He’s going back to the one skill that he thinks he has, which is self-promoting: diving into the media, diving into social media to compensate for his complete ineptitude at being the director of the FBI, which should not surprise anybody,” O’Leary said. “He has no leadership experience, no operational experience, no investigative experience.”
The former FBI official told Hayes that Patel’s judgment is “certainly flawed” and “his character and integrity and virtue are absent,” adding that he believes the director “has no loyalty to the Constitution or to the American public or to the mission of the FBI and its people.”
During a Tuesday appearance on Fox News, Patel told host Sean Hannity that “substantial progress” had been made in the probe and authorities had identified “persons of interest” in connection with the 84-year-old’s apparent abduction.
However, shortly after his interview, a man detained by authorities for questioning over Guthrie’s disappearance was released from custody.
On Wednesday’s “All In with Chris Hayes,” MS NOW national security intelligence analyst Christopher O’Leary, who served as a senior executive at the FBI’s counterterrorism division, called Patel’s comments on the investigation “incredibly inappropriate.”
“He’s going back to the one skill that he thinks he has, which is self-promoting: diving into the media, diving into social media to compensate for his complete ineptitude at being the director of the FBI, which should not surprise anybody,” O’Leary said. “He has no leadership experience, no operational experience, no investigative experience.”
The former FBI official told Hayes that Patel’s judgment is “certainly flawed” and “his character and integrity and virtue are absent,” adding that he believes the director “has no loyalty to the Constitution or to the American public or to the mission of the FBI and its people.”
February 13, 2026
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/despite-reality-trump-claims-he-has-been-100-exonerated-in-the-epstein-scandal
MaddowBlog-Despite reality, Trump claims he has been '100% exonerated' in the Epstein scandal
“‘I’m 100% exonerated’ will go down in history with ‘I am not a crook’ as one of the great criminal confessions of all time,” Jamie Raskin said.
After Trump claimed he’s been “100% exonerated†in the Epstein scandal, I asked @raskin.house.gov for his reaction.
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2026-02-13T17:20:36.382Z
“‘I’m 100% exonerated’ will go down in history with ‘I am not a crook’ as one of the great criminal confessions of all time,†he replied.
www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/despite-reality-trump-claims-he-has-been-100-exonerated-in-the-epstein-scandal
On Thursday morning, the president went further, publishing an odd message to his social media platform that began:
...No such proof exists. In fact, MaddowBlog reached out to Rep. Jamie Raskin, the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, to ask for his reaction to Trump’s claim.
“‘I’m 100% exonerated’ will go down in history with ‘I am not a crook’ as one of the great criminal confessions of all time,” the Maryland Democrat said.
While the investigation into the Epstein scandal moves forward, it’s likely that Trump will continue to claim that he has been exonerated, reality be damned. With this in mind, it’s worth pausing to appreciate the fact that the president has an unfortunate track record when it comes to this specific word.
...But either (a) Trump doesn’t know what “exonerated” means; (b) he has spent years trying to deceive the public about his culpability in a variety of serious scandals; or (c) both.
AG Pam Bondi, under intense fire from the Trump Deranged Radical Left Lunatics, was fantastic at yesterday’s Hearing on the never ending saga of Jeffrey Epstein, where the one thing that has been proven conclusively, much to their chagrin, was that President Donald J. Trump has been 100% exonerated of their ridiculous Russia, Russia, Russia type charges.
...No such proof exists. In fact, MaddowBlog reached out to Rep. Jamie Raskin, the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, to ask for his reaction to Trump’s claim.
“‘I’m 100% exonerated’ will go down in history with ‘I am not a crook’ as one of the great criminal confessions of all time,” the Maryland Democrat said.
While the investigation into the Epstein scandal moves forward, it’s likely that Trump will continue to claim that he has been exonerated, reality be damned. With this in mind, it’s worth pausing to appreciate the fact that the president has an unfortunate track record when it comes to this specific word.
In March 2018, Trump claimed that the House Intelligence Committee had completely exonerated him in the Russia scandal. That wasn’t true.
In June 2018, Trump said the Justice Department inspector general’s office had “totally” exonerated him in the Russia scandal. That was both wrong and kind of bonkers.
In February 2019, Trump claimed that the Senate Intelligence Committee also had exonerated him in the Russia scandal. That also wasn’t true.
In March 2019, Trump claimed the judge in a Paul Manafort trial exonerated him, too. That also wasn’t true.
In June 2021, Trump claimed he had been “totally exonerated” by testimony from former White House counsel Don McGahn, which was largely the opposite of the truth.
In February 2023, Trump insisted that a special grand jury in Fulton County, Georgia, had rewarded him with “total exoneration.” Not only didn’t that happen, the same special grand jury called for his criminal indictment. (He was later charged by a regular grand jury, which relied on the special grand jury’s findings.)
In June 2023, Trump published an item to his social media platform, declaring that he’d been “totally exonerated” in the classified documents scandal. That was also the opposite of the truth.
In June 2024, Trump claimed to have been “exonerated” for referring to the “very fine people” he saw protesting in Charlottesville, Virginia. That wasn’t true, either.
In July 2024, Trump claimed “total exoneration” in the hush-money-to-a-porn-star case — the one in which he was ultimately found guilty of multiple felonies — a claim that didn’t make any sense at all.
In October 2024, Trump claimed he had been “fully exonerated” in the classified documents scandal, which was completely wrong.
...But either (a) Trump doesn’t know what “exonerated” means; (b) he has spent years trying to deceive the public about his culpability in a variety of serious scandals; or (c) both.
February 13, 2026
https://www.rawstory.com/donald-trump-health-2675267204/
Trump is 'seen very little' and could be 'sicker than he lets on': ex-White House insider
trump is not well
Trump is 'seen very little' and could be 'sicker than he lets on': ex-White House insider
— Lee (@5newmanl.bsky.social) 2026-02-13T16:52:49.551Z
www.rawstory.com/donald-trump...
https://www.rawstory.com/donald-trump-health-2675267204/
An analyst Friday pointed out that President Donald Trump has made fewer public appearances over the past several weeks as questions over his health have continued to increase.
Brian Karem, Salon's White House columnist, described how Trump has boasted that Washington, D.C. is booming, but Karem returned this week after being away and found "a city without its energy" — comparing that to Trump's recent behavior.
"And while the District seems tired, Trump seems more so," Karem wrote. "It doesn’t even seem like the president is trying his hardest to lie to us anymore. He just repeats the same lies with less energy, as if he too has grown weary of his own rhetoric. He’s telling us to turn the page on the Epstein scandal. But he’s on that next page too."
Trump met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday, but did not hold a press conference or speak to press following the meeting like he typically does. Instead he posted on his Truth Social platform.
And his "lethargic" demeanor was noticeable the next day, Karem explained.
"It was a low-energy Trump who showed up on Thursday in the Roosevelt Room with Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin to announce he was repealing the federal government’s authority to regulate climate change," Karem wrote.
Brian Karem, Salon's White House columnist, described how Trump has boasted that Washington, D.C. is booming, but Karem returned this week after being away and found "a city without its energy" — comparing that to Trump's recent behavior.
"And while the District seems tired, Trump seems more so," Karem wrote. "It doesn’t even seem like the president is trying his hardest to lie to us anymore. He just repeats the same lies with less energy, as if he too has grown weary of his own rhetoric. He’s telling us to turn the page on the Epstein scandal. But he’s on that next page too."
Trump met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday, but did not hold a press conference or speak to press following the meeting like he typically does. Instead he posted on his Truth Social platform.
And his "lethargic" demeanor was noticeable the next day, Karem explained.
"It was a low-energy Trump who showed up on Thursday in the Roosevelt Room with Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin to announce he was repealing the federal government’s authority to regulate climate change," Karem wrote.
February 13, 2026
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/ag-pam-bondi-performed-for-an-audience-of-one-who-was-predictably-impressed
I have seen reports that trump may not have been happy. https://www.democraticunderground.com/100221016206
MaddowBlog-AG Pam Bondi performed for an audience of one, who was predictably impressed
The attorney general set her credibility on fire because she was desperate to make Donald Trump happy. It worked.
Pam Bondi set her credibility on fire because she was desperate to please her audience of one, who’s complained that she’s “weak and an ineffective enforcer of his agenda.â€
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2026-02-12T20:14:06.262Z
Evidently, her ridiculous theatrics worked like a charm.
www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/ag-pam-bondi-performed-for-an-audience-of-one-who-was-predictably-impressed
It was against this backdrop that the attorney general appeared before the House Judiciary Committee for a televised hearing on Wednesday, where she had a vested interest in being as combative, unprofessional and belligerent as possible in order to satisfy her audience of one.
And so she did exactly that.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/2021770716014948849
....A NOTUS report described the event as “a contender” for “the ugliest House hearing ever.”
Bondi refused to answer questions. She smeared members with prepared, prewritten insults. She shouted angrily at those who pressed her on issues she wanted to avoid. She talked over members. She even suggested one Jewish member, who lost family in the Nazi Holocaust, of being antisemitic.
In one especially memorable instance, the attorney general even insisted that committee members stop asking questions related to the Justice Department and start talking about the stock market.
....It was the whole point of the mind-numbing theatrics. The attorney general didn’t need to impress voters, who don’t elect Cabinet secretaries, and she didn’t need to impress members of Congress, who’ve already confirmed her and lack the votes to throw her out of office. She did, however, need to impress the man who sees her as “weak and an ineffective enforcer of his agenda.”
So she acted the way Trump wanted her to act — and it worked.
“AG Pam Bondi, under intense fire from the Trump Deranged Radical Left Lunatics, was fantastic at yesterday’s Hearing,” the president wrote to his social media platform the morning after she humiliated herself.
For the attorney general, that one sentence represented a mission-accomplished moment.
And so she did exactly that.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/2021770716014948849
....A NOTUS report described the event as “a contender” for “the ugliest House hearing ever.”
Bondi refused to answer questions. She smeared members with prepared, prewritten insults. She shouted angrily at those who pressed her on issues she wanted to avoid. She talked over members. She even suggested one Jewish member, who lost family in the Nazi Holocaust, of being antisemitic.
In one especially memorable instance, the attorney general even insisted that committee members stop asking questions related to the Justice Department and start talking about the stock market.
Bondi: "They are talking about Epstein today. This has been around since the Obama administration…The DOW is over ,000 right now…Americans' 401 (k) s and retirement savings are booming. That's what we should be talking about."
— The Bulwark (@thebulwark.com) 2026-02-11T16:20:07.764Z
....It was the whole point of the mind-numbing theatrics. The attorney general didn’t need to impress voters, who don’t elect Cabinet secretaries, and she didn’t need to impress members of Congress, who’ve already confirmed her and lack the votes to throw her out of office. She did, however, need to impress the man who sees her as “weak and an ineffective enforcer of his agenda.”
So she acted the way Trump wanted her to act — and it worked.
“AG Pam Bondi, under intense fire from the Trump Deranged Radical Left Lunatics, was fantastic at yesterday’s Hearing,” the president wrote to his social media platform the morning after she humiliated herself.
For the attorney general, that one sentence represented a mission-accomplished moment.
I have seen reports that trump may not have been happy. https://www.democraticunderground.com/100221016206
February 13, 2026
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-obama-2675265609/
Trump defends racist Obama video as 'very strong' documentation of key campaign claim
trump is truly mentally ill. This video was a pure racist attack on the Obamas and had nothing to do with voter fraudl
Donald Trump has excused the sharing of a racist video featuring Barack and Michelle Obama to his Truth Social account as it actually details voter fraud.
— Raw Story (@rawstory.com) 2026-02-13T15:05:59.657Z
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-obama-2675265609/
Donald Trump has excused the sharing of a racist video featuring Barack and Michelle Obama to his Truth Social account as it actually details voter fraud.
The president has erroneously claimed for years that the 2020 elections were rigged. His second term in the White House has led to some pressure on mail-in ballots and the repetition of claims that the Democratic Party did not win the 2020 election. Trump's post to Truth Social last week was criticized by politicians, though the president has tried to explain why the video had been shared, The Daily Beast reported.
He told reporters on Thursday, "That was a video on, as you know, on voter fraud. It was a fairly long video, and they had a little piece and it had to do with the Lion King. It’s doing very well, uh, it’s been shown all over the place, long before that was posted.
"But that was a very strong - and I’m sure you saw it - a very strong piece on voter fraud, and the piece we were talking about was all over the place, many times I believe, for years."
The video was shared to Trump's Truth Social account at around midnight on February 6, with the current president sharing a host of posts, including this video. Said video runs for one minute and two seconds, with the final seconds of the video depicting Barack and Michelle as animals.
Trump had previously targeted Obama with an artificially generated video of the former president being arrested in the Oval Office. The deepfake video appeared in July last year on the president's Truth Social account.
The president has erroneously claimed for years that the 2020 elections were rigged. His second term in the White House has led to some pressure on mail-in ballots and the repetition of claims that the Democratic Party did not win the 2020 election. Trump's post to Truth Social last week was criticized by politicians, though the president has tried to explain why the video had been shared, The Daily Beast reported.
He told reporters on Thursday, "That was a video on, as you know, on voter fraud. It was a fairly long video, and they had a little piece and it had to do with the Lion King. It’s doing very well, uh, it’s been shown all over the place, long before that was posted.
"But that was a very strong - and I’m sure you saw it - a very strong piece on voter fraud, and the piece we were talking about was all over the place, many times I believe, for years."
The video was shared to Trump's Truth Social account at around midnight on February 6, with the current president sharing a host of posts, including this video. Said video runs for one minute and two seconds, with the final seconds of the video depicting Barack and Michelle as animals.
Trump had previously targeted Obama with an artificially generated video of the former president being arrested in the Oval Office. The deepfake video appeared in July last year on the president's Truth Social account.
February 13, 2026
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/accused-of-being-a-white-nationalist-trump-state-dept-nominee-faces-bipartisan-pushback
How did this racist asshole get nominated?
MaddowBlog-Accused of being a white nationalist, Trump State Dept. nominee faces bipartisan pushback
Jeremy Carl’s odds of success are poor and falling, but there’s a larger question hanging overhead: Why in the world did the president nominate this guy?
Accused of being a white nationalist, Trump State Dept. nominee faces bipartisan pushback
— Mike Walker (@newnarrative.bsky.social) 2026-02-13T14:56:15.032Z
www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/accused-of-being-a-white-nationalist-trump-state-dept-nominee-faces-bipartisan-pushback
And then there’s Jeremy Carl, Trump’s nominee for assistant secretary of state for international organizations, who has a similarly offensive background, including publishing online commentary suggesting the Capitol rioters of Jan. 6, 2021, were treated worse than Black people in the South during the Jim Crow era. He’s similarly championed the “great replacement” conspiracy theory and condemned white people who celebrate Juneteenth.
“We are essentially moving,” he told Tucker Carlson in April 2024, “to what is effectively a postwhite America.”
In case that wasn’t quite enough, Carl has also criticized Jewish people for wanting to “relitigate” the Holocaust, while claiming that Jews are “overrepresented” in the ranks of American billionaires.
In a normal and healthy political environment, these revelations would have led the White House to pull the nomination. But Carl, still backed by Trump, nevertheless went to Capitol Hill on Thursday for his Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing, where Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut asked him about his stated concerns regarding “the erasure of white culture.” To put it mildly, Carl struggled to defend his right-wing worldview.
....After the hearing, one Senate Republican, Utah’s John Curtis, announced his opposition to the nominee.
“After reviewing his record and participating in today’s hearing, I do not believe that Jeremy Carl is the right person to represent our nation’s best interests in international forums, and I find his anti-Israel views and insensitive remarks about the Jewish people unbecoming of the position for which he has been nominated,” Curtis said in a statement.
While the Utahn is just one member, the GOP only has a one-vote advantage on the Foreign Relations Committee. In other words, if Curtis joins Democrats in opposing the nominee, he won’t have the votes to advance to the Senate floor.
Given the circumstances, Carl’s odds of being successfully confirmed are poor and falling, but there’s a larger question hanging overhead: Why in the world did the president nominate this guy, and why does Trump continue to support Carl’s nomination in light of everything we’ve learned about his indefensible worldview?
“We are essentially moving,” he told Tucker Carlson in April 2024, “to what is effectively a postwhite America.”
In case that wasn’t quite enough, Carl has also criticized Jewish people for wanting to “relitigate” the Holocaust, while claiming that Jews are “overrepresented” in the ranks of American billionaires.
In a normal and healthy political environment, these revelations would have led the White House to pull the nomination. But Carl, still backed by Trump, nevertheless went to Capitol Hill on Thursday for his Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing, where Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut asked him about his stated concerns regarding “the erasure of white culture.” To put it mildly, Carl struggled to defend his right-wing worldview.
Trump nominated a legit white nationalist to a top post at the State Department. I asked him some basic questions about his belief in the “erasure of white cultureâ€. Watch this embarrassing, fumbling answer. Like he has never before been asked to explain his views.
— Chris Murphy (@chrismurphyct.bsky.social) 2026-02-12T21:15:09.155Z
....After the hearing, one Senate Republican, Utah’s John Curtis, announced his opposition to the nominee.
“After reviewing his record and participating in today’s hearing, I do not believe that Jeremy Carl is the right person to represent our nation’s best interests in international forums, and I find his anti-Israel views and insensitive remarks about the Jewish people unbecoming of the position for which he has been nominated,” Curtis said in a statement.
While the Utahn is just one member, the GOP only has a one-vote advantage on the Foreign Relations Committee. In other words, if Curtis joins Democrats in opposing the nominee, he won’t have the votes to advance to the Senate floor.
Given the circumstances, Carl’s odds of being successfully confirmed are poor and falling, but there’s a larger question hanging overhead: Why in the world did the president nominate this guy, and why does Trump continue to support Carl’s nomination in light of everything we’ve learned about his indefensible worldview?
How did this racist asshole get nominated?
February 13, 2026
Don Lemon set to appear in federal court in Minnesota on charges stemming from church protest
I really do not expect this case to make it to trial
https://x.com/CNN/status/2022309975767302611
https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/13/media/don-lemon-arraignment-minnesota
Don Lemon will appear in a Minnesota courtroom Friday to be arraigned on federal charges following his arrest last month in connection with a protest at a church in St. Paul.
Federal prosecutors allege Lemon and another independent journalist, Georgia Fort, participated in a “takeover-style attack” of Cities Church and intimidated congregants, after the two livestreamed a group of anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement protesters rushing into the church on January 18, interrupting the service.
Lemon is being charged with two federal crimes: conspiring to violate someone’s constitutional rights and violating the FACE Act, which prohibits the use of force or threats to intentionally interfere with someone expressing their First Amendment right to practice religion.
The journalist and former CNN anchor – who now hosts his show on YouTube – has vowed to fight the charges. He has hired Joseph H. Thompson, a former Minnesota federal prosecutor, to represent him, according to court records filed earlier this week.
Federal prosecutors allege Lemon and another independent journalist, Georgia Fort, participated in a “takeover-style attack” of Cities Church and intimidated congregants, after the two livestreamed a group of anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement protesters rushing into the church on January 18, interrupting the service.
Lemon is being charged with two federal crimes: conspiring to violate someone’s constitutional rights and violating the FACE Act, which prohibits the use of force or threats to intentionally interfere with someone expressing their First Amendment right to practice religion.
The journalist and former CNN anchor – who now hosts his show on YouTube – has vowed to fight the charges. He has hired Joseph H. Thompson, a former Minnesota federal prosecutor, to represent him, according to court records filed earlier this week.
February 13, 2026
https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/the-save-america-act-would-disenfranchise-americans-living-abroad/
The SAVE America Act would disenfranchise Americans living abroad
NEW: Yesterday, the House passed the SAVE America Act, a measure that would disenfranchise millions of Americans domestically and abroad.
— Democracy Docket (@democracydocket.com) 2026-02-12T22:17:31.950370033Z
@demsabroad.bsky.social Martha McDevitt-Pugh asserts voting is not a privilege; it’s a constitutional right. And they do not lose that right when living abroad.
https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/the-save-america-act-would-disenfranchise-americans-living-abroad/
The millions of U.S. citizens living abroad love their country and are committed to taking part in American democracy despite the complexity and personal costs they must shoulder simply to request and cast a ballot.
Yesterday, that commitment to the democratic process was threatened by Republicans. The House of Representatives passed the SAVE America ACT, which if implemented, would cause voters living abroad — myself included — to effectively lose our right to make our voices heard.
And, as dangerous as it is, the measure isn’t the only GOP move that would restrict voting for Americans living abroad.
The “SAVE America Act” is a rebranded version of the anti-voter SAVE Act, and its new name should not fool anyone. It retains the most extreme provisions of the original proposal and goes even further, imposing requirements that would block millions of eligible Americans from voting, including nearly every American living and serving abroad.
Under the bill, voters would be required to provide proof of U.S. citizenship in person when registering to vote. Voters would also need to provide proof of state residency, and submit photo ID and citizenship documents not only when they register and request a ballot, but also when they cast a ballot. For U.S. citizens abroad, these requirements are not just inconvenient; they would be nearly impossible to comply with.
In 2024, more than 1.3 million Americans living abroad received ballots as abroad voters under long-standing federal law. These voters include military service members stationed abroad, diplomats, missionaries, students, retirees and Americans whose careers or families have taken them beyond U.S. borders. Requiring in-person registration inside the United States, combined with repeated documentation demands at multiple stages of the voting process, would almost entirely shut U.S. citizens living abroad out of elections.
Yesterday, that commitment to the democratic process was threatened by Republicans. The House of Representatives passed the SAVE America ACT, which if implemented, would cause voters living abroad — myself included — to effectively lose our right to make our voices heard.
And, as dangerous as it is, the measure isn’t the only GOP move that would restrict voting for Americans living abroad.
The “SAVE America Act” is a rebranded version of the anti-voter SAVE Act, and its new name should not fool anyone. It retains the most extreme provisions of the original proposal and goes even further, imposing requirements that would block millions of eligible Americans from voting, including nearly every American living and serving abroad.
Under the bill, voters would be required to provide proof of U.S. citizenship in person when registering to vote. Voters would also need to provide proof of state residency, and submit photo ID and citizenship documents not only when they register and request a ballot, but also when they cast a ballot. For U.S. citizens abroad, these requirements are not just inconvenient; they would be nearly impossible to comply with.
In 2024, more than 1.3 million Americans living abroad received ballots as abroad voters under long-standing federal law. These voters include military service members stationed abroad, diplomats, missionaries, students, retirees and Americans whose careers or families have taken them beyond U.S. borders. Requiring in-person registration inside the United States, combined with repeated documentation demands at multiple stages of the voting process, would almost entirely shut U.S. citizens living abroad out of elections.
February 13, 2026
https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/the-save-america-act-would-disenfranchise-americans-living-abroad/
The SAVE America Act would disenfranchise Americans living abroad
NEW: Yesterday, the House passed the SAVE America Act, a measure that would disenfranchise millions of Americans domestically and abroad.
— Democracy Docket (@democracydocket.com) 2026-02-12T22:17:31.950370033Z
@demsabroad.bsky.social Martha McDevitt-Pugh asserts voting is not a privilege; it’s a constitutional right. And they do not lose that right when living abroad.
https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/the-save-america-act-would-disenfranchise-americans-living-abroad/
The millions of U.S. citizens living abroad love their country and are committed to taking part in American democracy despite the complexity and personal costs they must shoulder simply to request and cast a ballot.
Yesterday, that commitment to the democratic process was threatened by Republicans. The House of Representatives passed the SAVE America ACT, which if implemented, would cause voters living abroad — myself included — to effectively lose our right to make our voices heard.
And, as dangerous as it is, the measure isn’t the only GOP move that would restrict voting for Americans living abroad.
The “SAVE America Act” is a rebranded version of the anti-voter SAVE Act, and its new name should not fool anyone. It retains the most extreme provisions of the original proposal and goes even further, imposing requirements that would block millions of eligible Americans from voting, including nearly every American living and serving abroad.
Under the bill, voters would be required to provide proof of U.S. citizenship in person when registering to vote. Voters would also need to provide proof of state residency, and submit photo ID and citizenship documents not only when they register and request a ballot, but also when they cast a ballot. For U.S. citizens abroad, these requirements are not just inconvenient; they would be nearly impossible to comply with.
In 2024, more than 1.3 million Americans living abroad received ballots as abroad voters under long-standing federal law. These voters include military service members stationed abroad, diplomats, missionaries, students, retirees and Americans whose careers or families have taken them beyond U.S. borders. Requiring in-person registration inside the United States, combined with repeated documentation demands at multiple stages of the voting process, would almost entirely shut U.S. citizens living abroad out of elections.
Yesterday, that commitment to the democratic process was threatened by Republicans. The House of Representatives passed the SAVE America ACT, which if implemented, would cause voters living abroad — myself included — to effectively lose our right to make our voices heard.
And, as dangerous as it is, the measure isn’t the only GOP move that would restrict voting for Americans living abroad.
The “SAVE America Act” is a rebranded version of the anti-voter SAVE Act, and its new name should not fool anyone. It retains the most extreme provisions of the original proposal and goes even further, imposing requirements that would block millions of eligible Americans from voting, including nearly every American living and serving abroad.
Under the bill, voters would be required to provide proof of U.S. citizenship in person when registering to vote. Voters would also need to provide proof of state residency, and submit photo ID and citizenship documents not only when they register and request a ballot, but also when they cast a ballot. For U.S. citizens abroad, these requirements are not just inconvenient; they would be nearly impossible to comply with.
In 2024, more than 1.3 million Americans living abroad received ballots as abroad voters under long-standing federal law. These voters include military service members stationed abroad, diplomats, missionaries, students, retirees and Americans whose careers or families have taken them beyond U.S. borders. Requiring in-person registration inside the United States, combined with repeated documentation demands at multiple stages of the voting process, would almost entirely shut U.S. citizens living abroad out of elections.
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Apr 5, 2004, 03:58 PMNumber of posts: 177,148