Senate Republicans have for weeks been debating the use of the “talking filibuster” to guarantee the passage of the SAVE America Act in the upper chamber, after President Donald Trump called the legislation his “No. 1” priority.
The bill, which would require proof of citizenship and a photo ID to vote in federal elections, was passed by the House in February by a 218-213 margin, with Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) being the only Democrat to vote for the proposed legislation. The SAVE America Act has stalled in the Senate, where pundits initially considered the bill doomed due to needing 60 votes to override the filibuster and strong Democratic opposition.
But with Trump’s full weight behind the SAVE America Act, several Republicans have been pushing to use the talking filibuster to sidestep the 60-vote threshold. The talking filibuster would force Democrats to physically hold the Senate floor. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) has insisted that there is not enough of an appetite among Senate Republicans to change the filibuster procedure, announcing his plans Tuesday to bring the bill to the floor next week without the talking filibuster.
But many MAGA hardliners on social media have been relentlessly calling for the talking filibuster, egging on debate over the procedure that has Senate Republicans split.
What is the talking filibuster?
There are two ways the Senate can end debate and break a filibuster on a bill: cloture and the talking filibuster. The talking filibuster was the way the Senate had ended debate before the Senate cloture mechanism became a chamber rule.
Essentially, the ‘talking filibuster’ sets up a marathon of speeches from the lawmakers opposing the bill, in which a senator cannot sit down, leave for the bathroom, or stop talking. Each senator opposing the bill has two chances to speak indefinitely about their opposition to the proposed legislation. Once each opposition Senator speaks twice and all proposed amendments and motions on separately debatable questions are voted on, then the chamber would only need a simple-majority vote to advance legislation.
This allows the Senate to buck the 60-vote threshold needed under the cloture rule and requires the opposition to put up a significant physical fight to voice their opinions on the bill.
Why are some Republicans wary of the talking filibuster?
The opposition’s ability to speak indefinitely and propose as many motions or amendments as they can could make the process difficult for the Republican majority as well. The majority party needs 51 Senators ready to be in the chamber to vote on motions and amendments as they arise.
This ready attendance — for what could be weeks on end — combined with the GOP leadership’s need to maintain unity within the Republican caucus, has made leaders like Thune skeptical of invoking the talking filibuster. Thune has also voiced his concern over the large amount of floor time that could be spent on the talking filibuster.
“We don’t have the votes either to proceed, get on a talking filibuster, nor to sustain one if we got on it,” Thune said Tuesday.
The longest talking filibuster speech ever recorded was performed by Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) from March 31 to April 1 of 2025, where he spoke for 25 hours and 4 minutes. Booker’s speech was atypical, as it was a single move and not a typical caucus-wide effort to block legislation. Before Booker, Sen. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina set the prior filibuster record at 24 hours and 18 minutes when he attempted to buck the Civil Rights Act of 1957 with a talking filibuster.
Despite skepticism from some leaders, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), the original Senate sponsor of the SAVE America Act, is standing by the talking filibuster as the best way to ensure the bill’s passage.
“Make Democrats speak if they want to filibuster. Exhaust them and channel the exhaustion the same way the Senate did with the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” Lee wrote on X on Monday.
THUNE SCHEDULES DOOMED SAVE AMERICA ACT VOTE AS MAGA PUSHES FILIBUSTER SHOWDOWN
The talking filibuster differs from the silent filibuster because it compels the opposition party to speak about the legislation.
The silent filibuster, first used in the 1970s, allows a group of at least 41 Senators to threaten a filibuster, which often leads Senate leadership to decline to hold a vote.
