Fetterman Makes Shocking Election Shift

Sen. John Fetterman (PA) has stirred controversy within his party by saying that requiring voter ID is not “unreasonable,” pointing to states like Wisconsin that already enforce similar laws. “It’s not a radical idea for regular Americans to show your ID to vote,” Fetterman said, while rejecting comparisons between voter ID requirements and Jim Crow–era restrictions.

As Senator Fetterman told Fox News:

Me, as a Democrat, I do not believe that it’s unreasonable to show ID just to vote. And I’d remind everybody that less than a year ago in Wisconsin they added that to the constitution by a 63% passing, to put that in the constitution that you had to show ID to vote. And they also elected a very, very liberal justice into their Supreme Court, so it’s not a radical idea for regular Americans to show your ID to vote . . . those things are not Jim Crow or anything. Of course that’s part of an awful, awful legacy of our nation from so long ago. But where we are now, trying to find a way forward – just trying to call balls and strikes, seeing what’s unreasonable.

Fetterman’s comments come as renewed attention is being paid to the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act; legislation that passed the House in mid-2025 and has been stagnating in the Senate ever since. The bill would require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and establish clearer, more uniform standards for election integrity nationwide.

As funding bills move forward and midterms inch closer, the question is whether the Senate will finally take this up, or will Democrats continue blocking the policy even though their own voters overwhelmingly support it? The numbers speak for themselves. According to Pew polling, 83% of American voters support requiring a government-issued photo ID to vote, including 71% of those identifying as Democrats. Not surprisingly, 95% of Republican voters support requiring an ID at 95%. In fact, only about 16% of Americans oppose voter ID laws. Yet somehow that small minority seems to have a firm grip on the lapels of Democratic leadership.

Instead of actually considering those numbers, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer dismissed the policy as “Jim Crow 2.0,” repeating a talking point that resurfaces whenever election safeguards are proposed. Notably, Schumer didn’t even address the fact that most Americans – and the majority of Democrats – disagree with him. With all due respect to Sen. Schumer, that’s not exactly what we’d call behaving like a “public servant.”

And for what it’s worth, most of us Americans have to present our ID constantly – whether to fly, pick up prescriptions, order a glass of wine, or even to get a library card or retrieve a package. And I’d wager, for the most part, no one complains or even gives it a second thought. And those examples are far less impactful on society than you going on vacation or buying an antihistamine. And in that same vein, I’d say for most Americans, presenting ID at the ballot box just feels like part of the process. As it should.

And the SAVE Act doesn’t just mean a driver’s license or passport, which not everyone has. It allows for a wide range of acceptable identification: REAL IDs, military IDs, government-issued photo IDs paired with proof of citizenship, and naturalization documents. And in many states, non-driver state IDs are available at little or even no cost for qualifying individuals. So it’s not an issue of socioeconomics either. Any American can get a government-issued ID easily, and affordably. 

But alright, if access is truly the concern of its critics, why not pair voter ID requirements with funding to help states just automatically issue free IDs? Why not bring mobile ID centers into underserved communities? Solutions such as those are almost never offered, or considered. Which raises an obvious question: If opposition to voter ID is truly about inclusion, why do Democrats – who have supported expansive assistance for undocumented migrants, including government-issued phones and prepaid debit cards – resist voter ID safeguards that enjoy broad public support? Requiring ID to vote is not about making the process harder, let alone swaying election results by eliminating voter access. In fact, quite the opposite – it’s about making our elections credible. John Fetterman didn’t say anything radical. He told the truth. And judging by the polling, he’s speaking for far more Americans than the politicians trying to shout him down. Requiring ID to vote isn’t a Left versus Right thing; it’s common sense versus dishonesty. It’s refreshing to see a prominent Dem agreeing with that.

Today’s Sekulow broadcast included more discussion of Senator Fetterman’s stance on the SAVE Act, despite it potentially costing him the support of his party. We were also joined by U.S. Special Presidential Envoy Ric Grenell to discuss a statement by U.S. Olympic skier Hunter Hess who stated he is “conflicted” about representing the United States.

Watch the full broadcast below: