As Americans prepare to vote in the November 3 midterm elections, state and local officials are bracing for possible disruptions ranging from federal intervention at polling places to challenges over voter eligibility and the handling of ballots.The concerns follow a series of unprecedented moves by Trump’s administration to increase federal control over elections, including demands for unredacted voter rolls, efforts to restrict mail-in voting and investigations targeting people suspected of voting as noncitizens. Courts have blocked several of these initiatives, but election officials and voting rights experts say the administration’s actions have added uncertainty ahead of polling day.In a report published on Monday, investigative newsroom ProPublica identified five areas that voting experts and election officials are watching: possible federal interference, challenges to alleged noncitizen voters, problems with voting procedures, election security and disputes over results after voting ends.The administration has not explicitly ruled out sending federal agents to polling places or seizing ballots and voting machines. Election officials, however, say they have been preparing for such possibilities while stressing that there is no evidence of a planned federal operation that would prevent voters from casting their ballots.
Could federal agents intervene at polling places?
An incident in Florida’s Leon County last month heightened concerns over federal law enforcement at polling sites. Mark Earley, the county’s supervisor of elections, told ProPublica he was “furious” when two marked US Customs and Border Protection vehicles appeared outside the county’s busiest early-voting location, despite repeated assurances that federal agents would stay away. Earley alerted the FBI, but later learnt the agents had stopped to vote while travelling out of state. He said their use of official vehicles showed “pretty bad judgment”.Washington Attorney General Nick Brown told ProPublica that state officials and voting rights groups had rehearsed responses to possible federal attempts to seize ballots or voting equipment. “We’ve seen the tension and chaos that’s in the air,” he said, calling the federal government “the biggest challenge to smooth elections right now”. The Justice Department said its election monitors would follow the law, though officials in Wyoming raised concerns after monitors questioned poll workers about their training and sought to inspect voting systems.
Could noncitizen voter investigations affect eligible voters?
The Trump administration’s efforts to identify suspected noncitizen voters have raised fears that eligible US citizens could be wrongly removed from voter rolls or discouraged from voting, according to voting rights groups cited by ProPublica.The Justice Department has sued California over more than 20,000 people it considers “likely” to be noncitizens, seeking to prevent their ballots from being counted. California called the allegation “specious”, while a Los Angeles County analysis found that many people on the list were not registered there or had never voted; some had said they were born in the US. Courts rejected the department’s bid to block the ballots and later restrained its demand for records from California officials, describing it as an “intimidation plan”.The department also threatened legal action against Washington state over a list of 400 suspected noncitizens. Secretary of state Steve Hobbs called the list unreliable, saying it included citizens, unregistered people and duplicate entries. Sam Trepel of the States United Democracy Center described the department’s actions as a “disturbing use of prosecutorial authority”.Voting rights advocates warn that the investigations could deter eligible citizens from voting. The Department of Homeland Security said it was not planning operations targeting polling places, adding that ICE would only make arrests there in response to safety threats. A spokesperson said the DHS and Justice Department remained focused on identifying and prosecuting noncitizens who vote in US elections.
Could changes to voting rules and systems cause problems?
Changes to voting laws and administrative systems have raised concerns about ballot rejections and hurdles for voters. In North Carolina, new rules require mail-in voters to provide identification and seal two envelopes, with Democracy Docket reporting a sharp rise in rejections over incorrectly sealed inner envelopes.Texas and other states have reduced or relocated polling sites. Tarrant County, for instance, cut its polling locations by nearly a third, potentially increasing queues and confusion, ProPublica reported. Texas also faced registration-system errors that delayed hundreds of thousands of applications, though county officials said the backlogs had been addressed.Meanwhile, election experts told ProPublica that isolated complaints about touch-screen voting machines do not indicate tampering. Manufacturer ES&S said it had received no widespread reports of problems, while experts said attempts to alter machine programming would be detected during pre-election testing.
How vulnerable are election systems to cyber and physical attacks?
Security concerns have grown after suspicious packages and false bomb threats targeted election offices. Last month, officials in several states, including Arizona, received envelopes containing white powder, later found to be non-toxic in Arizona. During the 2024 election, false bomb threats believed to have originated abroad forced evacuations at vote-counting sites, with a CISA-funded message board helping officials respond after the FBI deemed them non-credible.ProPublica reported that Trump’s dismantling of CISA has left state and local officials with less federal support, prompting nonprofits and states to take on a larger role in election security. Brennan Center for Justice’s Derek Tisler said states lack the capacity to manage these threats alone.
Could the results face legal challenges after voting?
Election lawyers fear the administration’s actions before the midterms could be followed by legal challenges after voting. The Justice Department sued Alaska to block certification of its Senate result if Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan loses, arguing that a second candidate with the same name could confuse voters. A federal judge dismissed the case on Sunday, but the administration is expected to appeal. Trump said he ordered the lawsuit, while The New York Times reported that aides to Democratic nominee Mary Peltola had helped organise the second candidate’s run.The intervention is unusual because federal law bars government interference in an active election, with challenges typically brought by losing candidates in state courts after voting. Washington Attorney General Nick Brown told ProPublica the case amounted to federal interference in the electoral process. Officials are also preparing for local boards to refuse certification over fraud allegations, while some lawyers fear Trump could pressure Congress to block newly elected Democrats from taking their seats. Legal experts cited by ProPublica said an incoming Democratic majority and the courts could resist such an effort, though it might cause temporary delays.
Officials prepare for worst-case scenarios
Across the country, state and local election officials have spent months training poll workers, coordinating with law enforcement and preparing legal responses in case federal agents or private groups attempt to disrupt voting.Election officials have also warned that threats and allegations of fraud could increase the risk of intimidation and violence against poll workers. Matt Crane, executive director of the Colorado County Clerks Association, told CNN that officials were under pressure because even a minor mistake could be amplified into a national disinformation campaign.Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes said the administration’s threats could themselves intimidate voters, but stressed that officials had not seen evidence of a planned disruption that would prevent people from voting. He said preparations were precautionary and should not deter people from going to the polls.Election officials have spent months preparing to run the 2026 vote, but the scale of those preparations reflects concerns that the challenges may extend beyond Election Day and into the counting and certification of results.