The SAVE Act

Peter Brown, born in Philadelphia, was detained by ICE for over seven months and nearly deported to Jamaica. Multiple U.S. citizen military veterans have been detained: George Retes (Army, Iraq War) for three days, Jilmar Ramos-Gomez (Marine Corps, Afghanistan) for three days despite having his passport and military ID on him, and William Vermie (Army, Purple Heart recipient) for eight hours. Just two weeks ago, an American citizen had his home entered without a warrant and was removed in his underwear in subfreezing temperatures while his grandson cried. Fourth Amendment apparently optional. (and more cases...)

But sure, nothing to worry about.

Turns out when enforcement operates at scale with racial profiling baked in, paperwork gets messy and "citizen" becomes surprisingly negotiable. If you're brown and get caught in a sweep, your birth certificate doesn't work like a force field. It just means you eventually get released (hopefully), maybe with an apology, maybe not, instead of deported. You should be grateful for the free detention experience, obviously.

So yeah, people with functioning brains and working eyes have reason to be concerned about ICE. If not for themselves, then for their fellow citizens whose constitutional rights are getting trampled.

For those who don't see this, maybe you're just in an echo chamber and genuinely weren't aware. But if you know and don't care? Then I guess constitutional protections only matter when they protect the right people.

 

The Democrats flooded the U.S. with MILLIONS of illegals. Mistakes are going to be made. None of this would be happening had the Biden Regime not opened the border. Why don't you lying leftists ever demonstrate a sliver of honesty by acknowledging this fact?

 

Reasoning failure on your part. People have noting to hide but still put their letters on sealed envelopes, vote in private booths etc.

There are far more pressing issues with voting security. They come from those in power now that have already tried to overturn one free and fair presidential election

 

I wonder if there will be an accurate statistical breakdown of what % of ICE arrests were made that shouldn’t have been. I think we have all seen the mistakes that have happened, but is it less than 1%? 5%? 10%? Of the total arrests thus far?

What level of inaccuracy in tracking down illegal criminals are people willing to accept to get the job done? I don’t know that there is anything in life we do as people where we expect 100% accuracy or effectiveness.

 

I'm all about IDs as long as they are free and simple to get.

 

This is a real question , but it also buries the lead that ICE is not going after the low hanging fruit. They could be getting people from prisons with zero risk , but instead are patrolling the streets asking for papers.

Since its not a "targeted operation" we should hold them to a higher bar.

Also in this type I vs type II error conversation , not only the probability needs to be discussed , but also the cost of errors. When the state takes the life of multiple American citizens , that cost is too high . Especially when the alternative is letting gardeners walk free for a few more days.

When you say illegal criminals do you mean violent illegal aliens , or do you mean criminal in the sense that they came here illegally and so they are criminal. Your question is much more valid for option number 1. The facts don't support that ICE's priority really is number 1 and that they are conducting operations under a different mindset.

 

SAVE act is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. But sure, ID sounds fine and is fine really. Just that the ROI here is near nil and it's mostly a peace of mind thing, which frankly, is probably worth it. I don't want another excuse for another Jan 6.

With that said, we do have MUCH bigger issues with our federal elections. If Republicans (and Dems as well) are genuinely about election integrity, we'd be addressing the elephant in the room: low voter turnout AND barriers to fair representation. Fair representation was already bad, but became worse when Republicans started gerrymandering for the midterms, letting politicians choose their voters instead of the other way around. When districts are drawn so that election outcomes are essentially predetermined, that's not voters choosing their representation. That's representatives choosing their voters.

So, if voting is important (and it is) so that Americans get to choose their government, we would be aiming to solve these two main issues. But we're only hearing about federal ID because, well, it's part of the larger scheme of choosing your voters, nothing more. It's a power grab.

 

So much embellishment and outright lies, in an attempt to pretend our rights are under attack -- let's get to debunking them.

Peter Brown from Philadelphia is an example from 8 years ago. That shows how far back you have to go to find an actual case of a US citizen being detained based on a parole violation.

DHS Debunks New York Times False Reporting: DHS Does NOT Deport U.S. Citizens | Homeland Security

George Retes was not detained for being illegal -- he assaulted federal law enforcement as they raided mar1juana sites and attempted to block their vehicles.

FALSE CLAIM: George Retes was wrongly arrested and held by ICE.

THE FACTS: As U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and ICE agents were executing criminal search warrants on July 10 at the mar1juana sites in Camarillo, CA, George Retes—a U.S. citizen—became violent and refused to comply with law enforcement. He challenged agents and blocked their route by refusing to move his vehicle out of the road. CBP arrested Retes for assault.

JIlmar Ramos is also an example from 8 years ago. He was arrested for setting a fire and pulling a fire alarm, and then there was confusion about whether he was an illegal or not. Anyone, legal or illegal, should be arrested for arson.

Ramos-Gomez, now 28, was arrested for trespassing in a secure area of the Spectrum Health Butterworth Hospital on Nov. 21, 2018. He set a fire and pulled an alarm.

He was not a patient at the hospital, but Kessler said he was struggling with post-traumatic stress at the time and accessed a helipad on the roof.

William Vernie was arrested for assaulting a federal officer during a protest - 8 hours of detainment is nothing for that. As we see with Alex Pretti, the "peaceful protestor" who kicked the taillight off a federal agents car, soft on crime policies lead to situations spiraling out of control.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security confirmed that Vermie was detained by federal agents. "This individual was arrested for assaulting a law enforcement officer – a felony and a federal crime," the DHS spokesperson said in a statement to ABC News. "Our brave law enforcement are grappling with a 1,347% increase in assaults and a staggering 8,000% uptick in death threats as they put their lives on the line to arrest murderers, rapists, pedophiles, and gang members."

And finally, the US citizen in Minnesota was suspected of housing sex criminal illegals who have since moved. While Thao disputes this claim, there's no way to tell who's telling the truth unless you've been his neighbor for the past 5 years.

• ICE Justification vs. Family Claims: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stated it was a "targeted operation" looking for two convicted sex offenders, claiming Thao lived with them and matched a description. Thao's family "categorically disputes" this, stating they have lived there for two years and do not know the individuals ICE was seeking.

So no, I don't have any fear of ICE. Primarily because I don't go around committing crimes and assaulting federal officers. You can't keep instigating then expecting to be treated with kiddie gloves.

 

ICE made a bad mistake 8 years ago in April 2018, and things are even worse today. Thanks for proving my point that Americans should be concerned about ICE.

DHS has lied in court and in public numerous times, so their "official" version of "the facts" means nothing to me and should mean nothing to anyone else. You know this, so using their page as proof of "the facts" is laughable.

And you ignored the other cases on purpose. You know and do not care, because constitutional protections only matter to you when they protect the right people.

 

Which problem do we think is bigger

Illegal aliens managing to finagle the system and vote

Or , the new forms of accepted ID in the bill prove difficult to get and legitimate voters end up not being able to vote

From my understanding it's REAL ID , passport , or birth certificate with current last name

https://democrats-cha.house.gov/sit...ument/SAVE Act Section-by-Section_BRANDED.pdf

This link shows some facts of the bill and the Democrats response .

I support the bill in theory , but if in practice getting the IDs required is cumbersome and difficult , then I don't .

Has anyone tried to get a passport lately ? What's the queue like ? Appointments are booked up , imagine if there is triple volume due to this law . Imagine the department of state simply slows down the process even more .

If the entity in charge of creating the IDs wasn't the same entity up for election , I would be more in favor . Seems like a conflict of interest

 

SAVE Act passed the House and is supposed to die in a filibuster in the Senate, God willing. This thread was discussing how 'reasonable' requiring voter id would be, provided the right structure was put around it -- the main one liberals looking for being an easy and free way to mass issue appropriate IDs to citizens so they can vote with a minimum of friction. But, that's not what this Act actually is. Thanks, snowcone for the link.

The text of the bill is here: Text - H.R.7296 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): SAVE America Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

1. The solution of issuing a free, compliant ID that found some agreement here for being a reasonable compromise of course is not contemplated in the bill.

2. A Real ID driver's license can do the trick, which is great, but they aren't ubiquitous yet with something like 65% of citizens holding one. Ten years from now, all the pre-Real IDs will have expired and all drivers will have an acceptable ID, but that's not now. Passports will supplement a bit, but the other acceptable forms are pains in the ass and too much friction to be considered reasonable. Apparently, they had to include an exception to the Paperwork Reduction Act because the requirements are too onerous to be legal otherwise.

3. The Real ID language seems to be really problematic. Specifically, it says, "A form of identification issued consistent with the requirements of the REAL ID Act of 2005 that indicates the applicant is a citizen of the United States." Real IDs do not indicate you are a citizen, only that you are lawfully present. The Enhanced Driver's Licenses issued by MI, MN, NY, VT, and WA (all blue states, ironically) are the only ones that indicate citizenship. So, if this sentence is going to require that the id both adhere to the REAL ID Act of 2005 and indicate you're a citizen, then actually the percentage of voters who can register with their driver's licenses is much, much lower than 65%.

4. Of course, they won't make all voters present this new ID if they are already on the voter rolls. This is where policy can magnify class differences and disenfranchise some while others don't even notice a change. A renter who changes apartments will have to prove his citizenship to change his address, but a homeowner who never has to move has no trouble. A man who keeps his name his whole life doesn't have to prove his citizenship, but a woman who marries and decides to take her husband's name does. And states can audit you for whatever suspicious thing that think they see in the data, and now you have a higher burden to prove your citizenship than the other guy they figured was fine. So the burden of compliance is completely uneven.

5. It kills mail voter registration, which really takes us backwards. We can do banking online and control for fraud, so why can't we do it for voting? This is really dumb and inefficient.

6. There seems to be an onus put on the election official for acquitting himself for any acts he does that results in a non-citizen voting, but does not contemplate acts of election officials that deny the vote to citizens. This is uneven if not completely backwards. Their first priority should be to facilitate citizens voting, and stopping illegal votes is also necessary but secondary.

7. But the worst part is that they want to make the law effective immediately so that it will be in force for the midterms. I didn't even mention all the additional administrative burdens the law creates for state and federal agencies that don't necessarily have the bandwidth to execute properly. Notice how the Real ID Act of 2005 was passed in 2005 and we are still rolling out implementation? Maybe it shouldn't have taken 20 years, but it is sensible when you are changing large processes like these to create a runway for predictable change so that we come into compliance over time without massive disruption. Maybe make a Gantt chart of what has to happen in what timeframe and what must be completed before other things are started. But no, they want it for the midterms. Not just because they don't fear the disruption. It's because they want the disruption.

Getting a passport from the post office is a nightmare experience. But, getting one from the Houston Public Library was a freakin' joy. Quiet, clean, in and out in 10 minutes. They even took the photo for me on the spot. State department was pretty quick too. I think it was maybe 4 weeks.

 

It seems your real issue is with an ineffective government unable to create a competent system.

 

The far left feel that black people and women can’t get the correct documentation to vote.

I thought the middle and right were racist and misogynistic?

Jokes write themselves!

 

We act like we save, but really we’re broke.

 

You misunderstand the risk. Most people who will vote in the next election are already registered and they will not be asked to provide documentation all over again to ensure they are citizens to continue their registration. But, some people will be new voters, some will be people who have to change their address, some people will have married and changed their name, and some will have their registration challenged by voter roll audits. Those people will have a higher burden of compliance, a greater amount of friction in casting a ballot, than other people. So, on the margin, they are incrementally less likely to cast a ballot than the people who aren't asked to do anything different. And lo, most of those groups I named are more likely to skew against Trump.

 

The fact is, it costs money to obtain documents. Voting is a right. Unless you are living completely off the radar, you know this is an extension of a scheme for politicians to choose their voters instead of voters choosing their politicians. Will it work? Who knows. But the intention is pretty clear.

For those who truly care about election integrity, start by worrying about a POTUS who is trying to undermine the Constitution and push for Republican-run elections. And if you do not care about that, then you are not serious about election integrity in the first place.

 

No one has dropped more racial slurs than far left protestors the past few months. Already seen 5-6 different incidents on video.



@pgabriel You can't only look for racism from conservatives --- need to hold liberals to account for their open racism. They are the party of slavery and struggle to let go to the mindset that they own minorities.

 

Sorry but I don’t trust the party that just tried to overturn the 2020 election and sent a violent mob to the capital when that failed.

If we want to create a bill to increase voting safety and decrease what little fraud there is, it needs to be bipartisan, and cannot be a tool for Trump and his maga fascist hacks to weaponize to rig the election this year when there is no evidence of fraud.

Sorry maga… you guys lie, attack democracy at every turn, and cannot be trusted. Not one democratic representative should vote for this.

 

The bill was written, and then passed as written by the house. I don’t attribute that to ineffectiveness or incompetence.

The flaws in the bill seem to be purposeful, and the rhetoric by its proponents isn’t matching the true intentions and reality of the policy. Nobody forced the house to pass a “broken” bill.