The Wall Street Journal editorial board on Monday took aim at President Trump's push to scrap the Senate's 60-vote filibuster rule to advance the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE America) Act, calling the strategy a dangerous miscalculation.
"Bad ideas are everywhere in Washington, but here's one that belongs in a hall of fame: President Trump is again pressing Republicans to nuke the Senate's 60-vote filibuster rule to pass the SAVE America Act," the board wrote. "Or in other words, hand progressives the tools to pack the Supreme Court and create new states, in exchange for a voting bill that isn't a clear political winner for the GOP."
The editorial described the trade-off as "a terrible trade," arguing that eliminating the filibuster for this legislation would set a dangerous precedent. The board also challenged Trump's rationale, stating, "Whether or not Mr. Trump truly believes that hordes of illegal voters are the only reason Republicans ever lose, it isn't true."
The clash comes as Trump and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) have publicly disagreed over the issue. Thune advised against canceling the Senate's August recess to debate the bill, noting it has repeatedly failed to secure enough votes on the floor. He also pushed back against Trump's repeated demands to eliminate the filibuster for the measure.
Thune said Monday that Trump has already heard from Senate Republicans that the votes aren't there to change the chamber's rules. "If I thought there was a path to getting a result, I'm all for it. ... We voted on it two, three, four, five times already, had it up on the floor for an extended period of time. Show me how this ends. What's the picture of victory at the end?" Thune said.
The editorial board's critique underscores broader tensions within the GOP over how to handle voting legislation. Some Republicans worry that eliminating the filibuster would eventually enable Democrats to pursue a sweeping expansion of voting rights, while others see the SAVE America Act as a political liability that could backfire at the ballot box.
Meanwhile, the White House has not yet responded to requests for comment on the editorial or Thune's remarks. The debate comes amid a series of Trump administration moves to speed deportations and other policy shifts that have drawn both support and criticism from across the political spectrum.
The SAVE America Act, which aims to tighten voter eligibility requirements, has been a legislative priority for Trump, but its repeated failures in the Senate highlight the difficulty of passing contentious election-related measures without broad bipartisan support. The White House has previously fired back at critics of Trump's policy initiatives, but the filibuster debate appears to be a rare instance where even some GOP allies are pushing back.
As the Senate faces a packed agenda, including nuclear waste storage talks and other pressing issues, the filibuster fight threatens to consume valuable floor time. Thune's skepticism suggests that, at least for now, the 60-vote threshold remains intact—despite Trump's pressure campaign.
