Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trump’s Elections Speech Was Not the Opening Shot; It was the Latest Salvo

Opinion

​U.S. President Donald Trump sitting in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Eric Lee/Getty Images

President Donald Trump’s recent address repeating his claim that he won the 2020 election was widely portrayed as a dramatic escalation of his attacks on our election system. It wasn’t.

It is nothing new!


Rather, it is only one element of a broader coordinated multiyear strategy that has combined litigation, executive action, personnel decisions, and state-level legislation to make voting harder and increase the likelihood that valid ballots will be challenged after they are cast.

Supporters argue these efforts are intended to prevent fraud and restore confidence in elections, and proposals such as voter ID requirements and prohibitions of noncitizen voting have appeal beyond Trump’s base. But critics contend that these policies target relatively minor problems while making voting more difficult, inviting more challenges to valid ballots, and further weakening confidence in the electoral system. When paired with repeated claims that elections are “rigged,” these proposals deepen public distrust in election administration and heighten the fear that Trump will contest the midterm results if they do not go his way.

Consider the evidence. In the 18 months since he returned to office, Trump has:

1. Appointed persons to key positions who will not acknowledge that Biden won the 2020 election, including Pam Bondi as Attorney General, Todd Blanche as her successor, Kash Patel as head of the FBI, and Markwayne Mullin, who has frequently called for a federal investigation into the 2020 election, as Secretary of Homeland Security. Bill Pulte, who Trump proclaimed would use the Office of National Intelligence to investigate “rigged elections” from 2020, now serves as the office’s Acting Director.

2. Undermined agencies responsible for election integrity and protection against foreign interference. He gutted the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and referred its former director, Christopher Krebs, who had earlier declared the 2020 election to be secure, to the Justice Department for investigation. Last month, Trump fired two members of the U.S Election Assistance Commission, leaving the body created by Congress in 2002 with no members.

3. Held up an important bipartisan housing bill to force the Senate to adopt the SAVE America Act, perhaps the most dramatic effort to undermine the ability of states to operate elections in history. So far, the U.S. Senate has called his bluff; the housing bill became law without Trump’s signature and SAVE seems to be going nowhere.

4. Attempted to acquire unredacted voting lists from each state in the nation. This is perhaps Trump’s most audacious power grab to date. If he can gain control of state voter lists, traditionally the province of state governments, he can use data to question whether votes were proper and throw election results into chaos.

While 23 mostly-Republican led states provided the data, 30 and the District of Columbia have not. Fortunately, Trump is losing legal challenges to this strategy. On March 31, Trump issued an executive order seeking to create a national voter list, which was promptly blocked by a federal judge. Trump sued states that refused to turn over their voter files. But private attorneys and state attorneys general fought back, and to date, Trump is 0 for 17 in these cases, losing every one that has come before a judge.

Federal control of voter lists is perhaps the greatest danger for the midterms and beyond. Centralized access to state voter files could allow the federal government to challenge voter eligibility on an unprecedented scale, potentially delaying certification of close contests and inviting extensive post-election litigation. The seizure of the Fulton County, Georgia files gives concern that this was a dry run for other confiscations this fall. Federal seizure of ballots or machines could delay final results and there are even scenarios where these delays could be used by the present republican-controlled House to deny seats to Democrats who win this November by small margins in hopes of preventing a Democratic takeover of the body.

5. Attacked mail-in voting. Trump has continually assailed mail-in voting, which is used by 30 percent of all voters and almost exclusively in several states. But when Trump tried to enlist the U.S. Postal Service in his scheme to make it more difficult, issuing an executive order requiring the agency to deliver a voter’s mail ballot only if their name is on a federally created list of enrolled voters, he was slapped down by federal Judge, whose 37-page ruling concluded that the president did not have the constitutional authority to regulate state elections. And the U.S. Supreme Court recent holding that federal law does not preempt states from setting their own deadlines for counting mail ballots only hurts Trump’s efforts.

These court rulings have not stopped the President; he appealed the postal service ruling and on July 17, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit stayed the lower court’s injunction, allowing USPS to move forward in implementing President Trump’s order in the states that have provided the files.

6. Warned states that officials could face criminal liability if they count ballots cast by noncitizens. The Justice Department recently sent letters to all 50 states and the District of Columbia threatening criminal prosecution if election officials counted any ballots cast by noncitizens in upcoming elections. Utah’s Republican lieutenant governor, called the tactic “bizarre,” and described the communication as “another love letter … from the DOJ … with threats of criminal prosecution…. for… resisting DOJ’s demands for private voter data that have thus far been ruled illegal by at least a dozen courts.” Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin then threatened to strip states of federal election-related aid, and to seek criminal penalties against election officials if they don’t comply with Trump’s demands.

6. Promised to send midterm election monitors to states, including Virginia, Arizona, Michigan, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and New Hampshire. Federal and state laws largely bar the deployment of federal law enforcement agents to polling places, but neither Trump nor Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche have ruled out the use of ICE for this purpose.

These initiatives, standing alone, do not guaranty that the 2026 elections will be disrupted. But taken together, they represent an unprecedented effort to expand federal influence over election administration—an area long managed primarily by the states. Whether these efforts ultimately succeed or fail, they have already intensified public distrust in the nation’s electoral process.

States Fight Back

This story is far from over. Courts have repeatedly rebuffed the President. After Trump issued an executive order requiring proof of citizenship, for example, a federal judge blocked the effort, saying that only states and Congress had that authority.

And state leaders continue to push back. While the Trump administration has received voter files from 23 mostly-Republican led states, many states resist. In addition, they are enacting measures to prevent federal intervention in elections. California, for example, made it a felony to seize ballots from county election officials, a law Governor Newsom signed on May 27 after the Riverside County sheriff seized more than 600,000 cast ballots.

Thirty-five states have criminalized intimidation and/or interference with election workers. States like Colorado, Nevada, and Virginia now allow election workers to keep their personal information confidential to avoid harassment. Connecticut passed a measure to bar law enforcement from being within 250 feet of a polling location, ballot Dropbox or vote-counting site without the permission of election officials. Washington state made it a felony to disclose personal information contained in the voter registration file to people other than state and local election officials without the permission of the secretary of state.

Eleven states—including New York, New Jersey, Virginia, and Minnesota—have enacted their own state-level Voting Rights Acts to establish state-level protections against voter suppression and ensuring independent state courts can protect ballot access regardless of federal action.

State attorneys general, local election officials, and private attorneys have become the front line of election defense, developing contingency plans if the federal government attempts to confiscate ballots or voting machines, disrupts the delivery of mail ballots, or sends troops or immigration agents to polling places. Hopefully, the concern is misplaced, and these defenses will not be needed.

It Ends With Us

The strength of American elections has never rested solely on laws or courts. It relies on citizens who participate, election officials who administer the process fairly, and institutions willing to enforce constitutional limits. Whatever one’s political views, confidence in elections ultimately depends on broad participation, respect for lawful outcomes, and vigilance against efforts that undermine public trust. Cast your vote as early as you can and encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.


Trump’s Elections Speech Was Not the Opening Shot; It was the Latest Salvo was originally published by Fights of Our Lives on Substack and is republished with permission.


Read More

A Democracy Cannot Run on an AI Model

Clerk Matthew Sandbar, 34, demonstrates part of the ballot-sorting process to members of the media attending a walkthrough of the Philadelphia Ballot Processing Center used to process the ballots of the 2022 US midterm elections, in Philadelphia on October 27, 2022.

Photo by Ryan Collerd / AFP via Getty Images

A Democracy Cannot Run on an AI Model

Tallying the results of Washington, DC’s first ranked-choice election in June took about 10 days—longer than many voters are used to. In an age when artificial intelligence can generate an answer in seconds, waiting days for election results can feel old-fashioned, inefficient, even suspicious. And it is about to matter far more widely. This November, 17 states, cities, and counties will use ranked-choice voting, including Maine and Alaska statewide, in races that could help decide control of Congress. More voters than ever will watch results take days to resolve, and more will be asked to trust a count they cannot see.

But that slowness may be one of its most democratic features.

Keep ReadingShow less
People waiting in a line outside as the sun sets.

Voters wait in line outside the Metropolitan Multi-Service Center to cast their ballots in Houston, Tuesday, Nov. 4, 2025. A recent state investigation confirmed that some registered voters flagged as potential noncitizens by a federal system had already provided proof of citizenship.

Brett Coomer/Houston Chronicle via Getty Images

Texas Confirms Some Flagged As Potential Noncitizens on Voter Rolls Had Provided DPS Proof of Citizenship

Election officials across the state should immediately reinstate some voters who were incorrectly flagged as potential noncitizens through a federal program, the Texas Secretary of State’s Office told county officials Wednesday.

Christina Adkins, the state elections director, told county officials the state had reviewed Texas Department of Public Safety records confirming the citizenship of some of the 2,724 registered voters who were flagged as potential noncitizens, according to an audio recording of her comments obtained by Votebeat and The Texas Tribune, as well as election officials who heard them. The voters were flagged after the state checked its voter roll through a federal program called Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, used to verify the citizenship of people registered to vote.

Keep ReadingShow less
People walking down the steps of the U.S. capitol.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) (C), Democratic Conference Chair Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA) (R), and House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA) (L) and other House Democrats arrive for a news conference on the House steps on November 12, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

DNC's Proposed RCV Ban Sparks Debate Over 2028 Presidential Primaries

Democratic National Committee insiders are poised to ban the use of ranked choice voting (RCV) in selecting their presidential nominee in 2028 – overriding presidential primary laws in Maine and Washington, D.C, and squashing great interest in this use of RCV among state legislators and the many state parties who run their own primaries.

Presidential primaries are among the most compelling use cases for RCV. They draw crowded fields of candidates that voters get to know and are eager to rank rather than be limited to one. Parties must unite their big tent of voters, and RCV rewards unifying candidates. The sequential nature of primaries is a problematic fit with early voting – in 2020, for example, more than three million Democratic voters cast a ballot for a candidate who had withdrawn before that vote was counted.

Keep ReadingShow less
  Creative Images Creative Images & Video Images Creative Editorial Video Creative Editorial  Search by image or video Close-up of woman holding a smartphone.

Can secure mobile voting expand election access? Explore how smartphone voting could increase turnout, improve accessibility, and modernize U.S. elections.

Sitthiphong/Getty Images

Mail-In Ballots Are Still Under Attack. Mobile Voting Can Protect Access To The Ballot Box.

Late last year, I became CEO of The Mobile Voting Project. Previously, I served as Chief of Staff to two United States senators, Chief of Staff at the US Department of Education, and Chief of Staff for Vice President Kamala Harris's presidential campaign. At every step in my public service career, I have always had one clear goal: making government work better for everyday people.

I believe that we cannot make government work better if we do not start at the very foundation of our government itself: democracy and voting. In my current role with The Mobile Voting Project, we are focused on making voting more seamless, secure, and accessible. We believe that putting democracy — literally — into the palms of every American’s hand is how we can boost turnout, reduce extremism, and strengthen our democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less