Jim Crow called — it wants its smear back

Opponents of the SAVE America Act have reached for the oldest smear in the election-law playbook: racism.

Sunny Hostin of “The View” recently said she opposed the bill because it would “disproportionately affect African-American voters.” She compared proof-of-citizenship requirements to Jim Crow devices such as literacy tests and jelly bean counting.

Election reform cannot proceed honestly while racial demagoguery substitutes for argument.

The comparison is historically illiterate.

Poll taxes, literacy tests, and arbitrary guessing games were designed to keep black Americans from voting. Requiring voters to prove identity and citizenship applies a neutral rule to everyone.

The SAVE America Act would require applicants for federal voter registration to provide documentary proof of citizenship, such as a passport, a REAL ID indicating citizenship, or qualifying military records. Related provisions would require photo identification at the polls.

Those are not instruments of racial exclusion. They are ordinary safeguards meant to ensure that only eligible citizens participate in federal elections.

Democratic politicians and media figures have spent years describing voter-identification laws as “Jim Crow 2.0.” Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Stacey Abrams, and others have portrayed routine verification as a deliberate attack on minority voters.

The claim insults the people it supposedly defends.

Polls consistently show broad support for voter identification, often above 80% overall, with strong majorities among black and Hispanic voters. Millions of minority Americans already use driver’s licenses, state identification cards, and other government-issued documents because modern life requires them.

Americans need identification to board a commercial flight, open a bank account, cash a check, buy alcohol or tobacco, rent a car, enter many offices and government buildings, collect some prescriptions, and check into a hotel.

Even New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, an opponent of voter-identification requirements, recently announced that his taxpayer-funded grocery stores would require identification for entry.

RELATED: Mamdani rejects voter ID, but his grocery stores may ask shoppers for proof

Spencer Platt/Getty Images

The country accepts identity verification for countless transactions carrying far lower stakes than choosing its leaders. The idea that voting alone must remain exempt from basic verification makes no sense.

Critics next argue that noncitizen voting is rare and therefore unworthy of concern. Recent examples show why prevention remains vital.

In New Jersey, Governor Mikie Sherrill (D) disclosed last month that a software error at the Motor Vehicle Commission improperly registered roughly 6,600 noncitizens between June 2023 and June 2024. About 400 of them cast ballots. The Trump administration believes the number may be much higher.

In North Carolina, authorities previously charged 19 foreign nationals with voting unlawfully in the 2016 elections. In Philadelphia, an illegal immigrant was arrested after allegedly voting in several federal elections.

None of those cases proves that noncitizen voting determines every election. They do prove, at a minimum, that registration systems make mistakes and that ineligible people sometimes vote. One can only imagine the depth of election fraud a DOGE-style investigation into all 50 states’ practices would uncover.

The most revealing feature of the opposition is its refusal to separate legitimate access concerns from the basic question of eligibility. Lawmakers can provide free identification, mobile enrollment services, and reasonable procedures for citizens who lack standard documents while still requiring proof that applicants are citizens.

That would expand lawful access and protect lawful votes at the same time.

Instead, critics invoke the ugliest chapters of American history to shut down discussion. They treat any identity or citizenship requirement as presumptively racist and imply that minority voters are uniquely incapable of complying with ordinary rules.

Americans of every race deserve elections in which every lawful vote counts and every unlawful vote is excluded. Proof of identity and citizenship is not an attack on democracy. It is the minimum a democracy owes its citizens.

Election reform cannot proceed honestly while racial demagoguery substitutes for argument. The people using Jim Crow as a shield against neutral safeguards should be shunned, not indulged.