Former President Donald Trump has publicly expressed a desire to influence upcoming elections, raising questions about the potential for his administration to interfere with the electoral process. An investigation by Reuters, involving interviews with over 50 election officials, voting experts, and lawyers, alongside a review of Trump's statements and federal agency actions, has identified nine scenarios where federal authority might be tested.

While the U.S. Constitution grants states broad authority over election administration, and courts have historically upheld this power, election officials nationwide are preparing for potential federal interference. Many believe the greatest risk lies not in a single intervention altering an outcome, but in a series of investigations, legal challenges, and disputes that could delay results, erode public confidence, and destabilize close races.

The White House has stated its goal is to safeguard election integrity and voting security. Responding to the scenarios, a spokesperson accused Democrats of undermining confidence by opposing legislation that would mandate proof of citizenship for voter registration and photo identification for casting ballots.

Trump has a history of contesting election results. Following his 2020 loss to Joe Biden, he urged Georgia's top election official to "find" enough votes to reverse his defeat and called supporters to a rally on January 6, 2021, which preceded the attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Potential Election Interference Scenarios

Allegations of Election Fraud or Compromised Voting Machines: Trump has frequently cast doubt on election results he dislikes, often alleging fraud without substantiation. Election officials anticipate similar claims during the midterms, focusing on allegations of noncitizen voting, manipulated voting machines, tampered ballots, or suspicious late-counted votes. Despite investigations finding no wrongdoing, these claims have fueled harassment of election workers and efforts to overturn past results.

Pressuring Officials to Alter or Cancel Results: Experts suggest Trump or his administration could pressure election officials, legislators, or state authorities to reject certified results based on fraud allegations. This echoes efforts after the 2020 election, where Trump's lawyers and allies reportedly pressured state lawmakers in Michigan, Arizona, and Pennsylvania.

Seizing Ballots or Voting Equipment: Election officials are concerned about the potential seizure of voting records and equipment via court-approved warrants or subpoenas. Such actions could disrupt vote counts, break the chain of custody for election materials, and delay certification. Federal agents previously raided election offices in Fulton County, Georgia, seizing hundreds of boxes of 2020 election records.

Federal Election Monitors Interfering with Voting: The Justice Department plans to deploy 1,000 federal election monitors, more than in any previous election. While their stated goal is to ensure compliance with civil rights and voting laws, recent events have raised questions about whether monitors could exceed their traditional role. Election officials in Wyoming, for example, objected to Justice Department monitors seeking to interview voters and inspect equipment.

ICE Presence Near Polling Sites: The potential involvement of federal immigration enforcement agencies near polling places is seen as a wildcard that could depress turnout, particularly in immigrant communities. While agencies like U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) could conduct operations in nearby areas, sending armed agents directly to polling places would likely violate federal laws.

Troops at Polling Places: The deployment of military forces is considered a dramatic and potentially unlawful scenario. Trump could invoke the Insurrection Act, claiming interference with the election or noncitizen voting. However, federal laws forbid troops from deploying to polling locations or interfering with election administration, even under the act's provisions.

Emergency Declaration: Some Trump allies have urged him to declare a national emergency over alleged voter fraud or foreign interference, potentially to justify greater federal involvement in vote counting. Legal experts, however, state that a national emergency declaration would not grant the president constitutional authority to take over election administration, which is primarily a state responsibility.

Federal Investigations and Charges Against Election Officials: The Justice Department has sent letters warning state and local election administrators they could face prosecution for knowingly allowing noncitizens to vote or failing to adequately remove them from voter rolls. Election officials from both parties have characterized these warnings as intimidation, though investigations themselves could consume significant time and resources.

Congress Refuses to Seat Election Winners: Trump could pressure Republican leaders in Congress to use procedural tactics to delay or challenge the seating of Democratic candidates in close races. While unlikely to succeed in overturning results, such actions could cause significant confusion and political turmoil, potentially leaving seats unfilled when Congress convenes.

Safeguarding Election Integrity

States employ multiple safeguards to protect the chain of custody for ballots and voting equipment. Voting and tabulation machines undergo public testing before each election. Ballots, whether paper or mail-in, are kept in secure containers, tracked during transport, and often protected by measures like video surveillance and signature verification for mail-in ballots. Nearly all votes cast in the U.S. generate a paper record that can be used to verify electronic vote totals.