State Election Officials Prepare for Potential Federal Interference in 2026 Midterms

As the 2026 midterm elections approach, state and local election officials are bracing for potential interference from the federal government following calls from President Donald Trump to “nationalize” elections. Concerns center around the possibility of federal overreach into state-run election processes, prompting several states to enact measures to protect the integrity of their elections.

Trump’s Calls for Nationalized Elections

President Trump’s push for greater federal control over elections began with an executive order in March 2025 requiring voters to prove citizenship in federal elections, a responsibility traditionally held by the states. Stateline reports that Trump subsequently called for Republicans to “nationalize” elections and take over voting in at least 15 unspecified locations. He has reaffirmed his view that states are merely “agents” of the federal government in elections. Politico highlights growing alarm among bipartisan election officials regarding these actions.

State Responses to Federal Pressure

In response to these concerns, several Democratic-led states are taking steps to limit the presence of federal immigration agents near polling places and election sites. These measures aim to prevent confrontations between federal agents and voters and safeguard the voting process. Legislation has been proposed or announced in California, Connecticut, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Washington. A bill has also been introduced in Kansas, though its passage is unlikely given the state’s Republican-controlled legislature.

Legislative Actions

• California: Legislation empowers county election officials to keep polls open if voting is disrupted by federal immigration enforcement.
• New Mexico: A bill prohibits the deployment of military or armed federal personnel to polling locations 28 days before Election Day and protects state election rules from federal interference.
• Virginia: A bill would prohibit federal civil immigration enforcement within 40 feet of polling places and voting counting sites.
• Washington: A bill would require local election officials to block access to ballot processing areas for immigration enforcement purposes, except with a warrant.

Federal Law and Constitutional Concerns

Existing federal law prohibits sending the military or armed personnel to polling places except to repel armed enemies. The U.S. Constitution also assigns the responsibility for running elections to the states. However, Trump’s actions and statements have prompted states to proactively address potential federal overreach. Lawmakers are mindful of the Constitution’s supremacy clause, which generally gives federal law precedence over state law, and are crafting legislation to avoid constitutional challenges.

Concerns About ICE and DOJ Involvement

Concerns extend beyond direct military intervention to include potential actions by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Department of Justice (DOJ). Former Trump advisor Steve Bannon suggested ICE might surround polling places, though White House press secretary Karolina Leavitt did not rule out the possibility. The New York Times reports that Trump has shown increased eagerness to leverage federal investigative and prosecutorial powers ahead of the midterms.

Despite assurances from the Department of Homeland Security that ICE is not planning operations “targeting” polling places, officials remain wary. ICE’s current leader, Todd Lyons, stated in February that agents could arrest individuals if a public safety threat emerged at a polling location. Democratic lawmakers argue that these assurances are insufficient and that proactive measures are necessary to protect voters.

Republican Opposition and Counter-Proposals

Some Republican lawmakers dismiss the Democratic measures as unnecessary “fearmongering.” In Arizona, a Republican state senator proposed a bill requiring counties to contract with ICE to provide a law enforcement presence at polling places, though the measure was ultimately stalled.

Looking Ahead

As the 2026 midterm elections draw closer, the potential for federal interference remains a significant concern for state and local election officials. The actions taken by states to protect their election processes, coupled with ongoing legal and constitutional debates, underscore the high stakes of the upcoming elections. Courts will likely be asked to weigh in on the limits of federal power over state-run elections, potentially setting precedents for future contests.