Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Bipartisan group asks DOJ to further protect election workers

Bipartisan group asks DOJ to further protect election workers

A line of people voting at voting machines in a polling place with their backs facing the camera.

After an increase in threats to election workers during and following the 2020 election, a bipartisan group is calling on the Department of Justice to bolster and reinforce protections for the people who maintain the integrity of U.S. elections.

The Alliance for Securing Democracy and the Bipartisan Policy Center released a report last week with recommendations for improving the DOJ’s Election Threat Task Force. The report focused on reimagining federal laws and enhancing the DOJ’s guidance for law enforcement and local and state governments.


Threats against poll workers had been exacerbated by false, widespread claims of election fraud in the 2020 election. Two years later, as the country holds primaries and caucuses for the midterm elections, the danger of those threats has not waned.

In June, the DOJ released a report warning that calls for violence against poll workers is likely to increase as elections continue, designating that violence as part of their summary of terrorist threats to the country.

However, there is worry the Justice Department has not done enough to address the problem. That is leading to a number of issues - including the loss of experienced election officials who are leaving the field.

David Levine, a co-author of the report and the elections integrity fellow for the Alliance for Securing Democracy, said it’s critical to make sure the people on which American democracy rests feel safe and remain in their roles.

“What we want is the DOJ then to be able to provide guidance to others involved in these efforts… we want them to be aware of what other tools exist to help make election workers feel safe,” Levine said.

The main call to action of the report was for the DOJ to release guidance for local law enforcement, the FBI’s field offices and all others on the “front lines” of elections to show how federal laws can deter and hold accountable those threatening election officials.

The report states that such guidance would serve three purposes:

  • show that the issue of threats to election workers remains a priority;
  • ideate around safety mechanisms for poll workers, and;
  • help explain when a threat can be prosecuted.

Even if a threat to an election official isn’t criminally prosecutable, there are still measures to take to ensure the safety of election workers. The DOJ’s Election Threat Task Force could be a resource for issuing guidelines for how legislatures can go about holding individuals civilly accountable for threats toward or intimidation of election workers, the report said.

Levine thinks the report offers a way for the DOJ to more effectively achieve the purpose of its task force and protect election security.

“People don’t perceive the folks that run our elections to be our stewards of democracy,” Levine said. “They see them as obstacles to their own political ends, and that’s just a really dangerous place to be.”


Read More

U.S. Rep. Young Kim (R-CA)

U.S. Rep. Young Kim (R-CA) speaks during a news conference in front of the U.S. Capitol to commemorate the 36th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square protests and massacre on June 4, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Kim removed references to Trump and his “America First” agenda from her campaign site and materials.

(Alex Wong/Getty Images/TNS)

GOP candidates are rushing to rebrand before November’s midterms

“If you want to know what a politician is up to, watch his feet, not his mouth,” historian Marvin Meyers wrote in his magisterial “The Jacksonian Persuasion” in 1957.

It’s still good advice. In private conversations, Republicans are talking a big game about how they’re not worried about November’s midterms, according to several informed sources I’ve talked to. But it’s not just in private. “Today, I don’t think there will be a blue wave at all,” White House Deputy Chief of Staff James Blair told the Free Press earlier this month. Blair is the man tasked with overseeing the midterms for President Trump’s MAGA Inc. super-PAC.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Close up of white ballot box with American flag in the background

Close up of white ballot box with American flag in the background during US Midterm Congressional Elections 2026.

Getty Images

National Security Leaders Sound Alarm on Armed Election Deployments

With Election Day approaching, concerns continue to mount over the possibility that the Trump administration could deploy armed federal agents to election sites. Democratic leaders, the NAACP, and the American Civil Liberties Union have already raised alarms, filing lawsuits after senior administration officials repeatedly refused to rule out sending armed federal agents or immigration officers to polling places during the 2026 midterm elections.

A Warning from National Security Leaders

On September 14th, National Security Leaders for America (NSL4A)—a nonpartisan network of more than 1,600 senior national security professionals, including retired admirals, generals, senior enlisted leaders, intelligence officers, diplomats, and civilian service officials—issued an unusually direct call to action. They urged state attorneys general to prepare now to seek emergency injunctive relief if the federal government takes identifiable steps toward deploying uniformed military forces or massed armed federal law enforcement personnel into major American cities in connection with the November elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Robot Holding a Resume Doing HR Work Vector Illustration

AI résumé screening can filter out qualified candidates before a human ever looks. Here's why transparency and human oversight in hiring matter.

nicoletaionescu/Getty Images

When AI Screens the Resume, Who Gets a Fair Shot at Work?

A job seeker can spend hours tailoring a résumé, checking qualifications and writing a thoughtful application, believing the next step will be a person deciding whether to schedule an interview.

Increasingly, that assumption may be wrong.

Keep ReadingShow less