American democracy faces one of its biggest stress tests of the modern era, as President Donald Trump’s sprawling campaign for power over elections encounters a firewall of judges, state election workers and voting rights leaders heading into Election Day.

A cascade of courtroom losses over the weekend dealt a major blow to the Trump administration’s last-minute efforts ahead of Tuesday to assert authority over voting and hold the prospect of prosecutions over the heads of state election officials. 

But another round of last-minute court hearings was set for Monday — and the U.S. Department of Justice asked the U.S. Supreme Court to require California to set aside the ballots of 20,000 suspected noncitizens.

Democrats, voting rights groups and even some former Trump administration officials have said they are braced for a range of possible disruptions and interference, especially as the president stares down the prospect of a blue wave that could wash away Republican control of Congress. Elections forecasters have said Democrats are on track to win control of the U.S. House and possibly the Senate, amid voter unhappiness with rising consumer costs.

“I fully expect my former boss, Donald Trump, to try to steal this election,” Miles Taylor, a deputy Department of Homeland Security chief of staff during the first Trump administration who became an outspoken Trump critic, told reporters last week.

Trump and his supporters have said the federal government’s actions are necessary to protect against noncitizen voting, which they warn cancels out the votes of Americans. 

While researchers have consistently found that noncitizen voting is rare and doesn’t impact the outcome of elections, Homeland Security has arrested dozens of noncitizens on allegations of election crimes in recent weeks, part of a concerted effort by the Trump administration to ramp up enforcement ahead of the election.

The last-minute push, Trump allies note, comes after the Senate didn’t advance Trump’s signature election legislation, the SAVE America Act, which would have imposed stringent requirements on voters to show proof of citizenship. The legislation passed the House but faced bipartisan opposition in the Senate.

“They voted against proof of citizenship so they can cheat,” Trump said during a rally in Salina, Kansas, on Sunday.

In the past four days, a federal judge ordered the list of 20,000 suspected noncitizens in California shared with an immigrant rights group, which said Saturday it found major problems with its veracity.

Another judge blocked the Justice Department from threatening election workers with prosecution. In Alaska, a judge dismissed a lawsuit that preemptively sought to question the certification of the results of Alaska’s U.S. Senate race. An appeals court also upheld limits on preelection field operations by Homeland Security.

On Monday, judges were expected to weigh requests to restrict federal law enforcement agents from serving as election monitors and additional limits on armed federal personnel at polling locations. Federal law broadly prohibits armed federal troops or agents at election sites.

Planning for ‘every single scenario’

As the court losses pile up, Democrats, civic leaders and election experts have watched with a wary eye toward how Trump will respond.

Election preparations by critics of the Trump administration have been underway for months. Congressional Democrats have mapped out dozens of scenarios, including the possibility that Trump will falsely point to a foreign threat against U.S. elections as an excuse to disrupt voting or seize voting machines.

They have also assembled a field army of volunteers to assist voters and monitor polling locations for signs of federal interference. Teams of lawyers have drafted a range of possible lawsuits that can be quickly filed if problems arise.

Virginia Kase Solomón, president and CEO of the nonpartisan watchdog Common Cause, said her organization is deploying more than 21,000 election protection volunteers sporting bright yellow shirts. Common Cause has also trained 3,000 volunteers to work a voter hotline.

“Common Cause is prepared for every single scenario and we are refusing to let fear win,” Kase Solomón said during a recent press briefing.

Noncitizen voters

The Trump administration’s actions follow a refusal by dozens of states, including California, to share their full voter roll that includes sensitive personal data — information the Trump administration says would allow it to identify noncitizen voters.

“California could, but refuses to, provide the unredacted list, which would resolve this entire dispute in a matter of hours,” Bill Essayli, first assistant U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, wrote on social media over the weekend.

But Trump has spent years promoting falsehoods about stolen elections, long before the more recent focus on noncitizen voting. After he lost the 2020 election, the president and his allies waged an extensive pressure campaign in a bid to overturn his losses in key battleground states. 

Some supporters advanced baseless conspiracy theories about voting machines. As the midterm elections approach, Trump has again begun casting a cloud of suspicion over voting machines. 

He spoke about alleged vulnerabilities in the machines during a primetime speech in July, though in every state except Louisiana, machines produce paper records that can later be checked. In the final hours of the election, the president is returning to the theme.

“You know the paper ballots cost 9% of what these crooked machines cost,” Trump said at a rally in Dubuque, Iowa, on Sunday.

Trump’s intensifying rhetoric has been matched by the Justice Department’s rapid-fire legal challenges over the past several days seeking to influence elections, which under the U.S. Constitution are run by the states.

With polls set to open in a matter of hours, federal judges have blocked the Trump administration at every turn.

Threats to election workers

Late Friday, Judge Trina Thompson, an appointee of President Joe Biden in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, issued a temporary restraining order preventing the Trump administration from threatening election workers nationwide with prosecution. 

The order came after Essayli, during a court hearing last week, raised the possibility that California election officials could face “criminal liability” if they count the ballots of noncitizens. 

The Justice Department on Thursday also sent a letter to election officials nationwide that reiterated requirements under federal law to preserve election-related records and listed the criminal consequences of noncompliance.

When election officials perform the work in the manner required by state and federal law, “they do not violate federal criminal law even if a particular ballot belongs” to an ineligible voter, Thompson wrote.

The Justice Department has appealed the order to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“Reminding election officials to follow federal law is a civic service, not a ‘threat,’” Acting Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter said on X.

Supreme Court weighs ballots case

Weeks after the Justice Department sued California in an effort to force election officials to set aside and not count the ballots of 20,000 voters it said were suspected noncitizens, the case reached the Supreme Court on Monday.

“If it turns out that those individuals cast ballots but are not, in fact, U.S. citizens, then California’s counting of their votes will violate (federal law) and will debase or dilute valid votes cast by U.S. citizens,” U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in an emergency application to the high court.

The Justice Department has so far failed in its effort to require California to set aside ballots from individuals on the list, which was compiled by Homeland Security based on checks of government records and use of the research service LexisNexis. A district court judge and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals have both ruled against the Trump administration.

An immigrant rights group raised serious concerns about the list over the weekend after a judge forced the Trump administration to share a copy with the organization.

The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA, said in a court filing Saturday that an analysis by data experts found that 42% of the names weren’t found on California’s current voter file. At least 22 names on the list are on a list of U.S. citizens compiled by the organization, the analysis found.

Judge James Boasberg, an appointee of President Barack Obama in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, on Monday prohibited the Justice Department from demanding that California set aside ballots — echoing previous rulings in the case now before the Supreme Court.

In Washington state, the Justice Department has demanded election officials set aside about 400 ballots from voters it alleges are noncitizens. On Sunday, several civil rights groups sued to block any segregation of ballots.

“We are days away from Election Day and these threats, again, are an attempt to sow fear and throw out eligible votes with no transparency,” Lilliane Ballesteros, executive director of the Latino Community Fund of Washington state, said in a statement.

Federal monitors at the polls

On Sunday, the NAACP asked for a temporary restraining order to prevent a wide swath of federal law enforcement agents from serving as election monitors.

The Justice Department has deployed election monitors for decades to watch polling places for compliance with federal voting rights laws. But the Trump administration has expanded the program, and plans to have roughly 1,000 monitors stationed across all 50 states on Election Day.

Justice Department lawyers typically serve as monitors, but the Trump administration this year also plans to tap federal law enforcement agents. In a court filing, the NAACP alleged the deployments are illegal and will have a chilling effect that intimidates voters.

“The law is clear — law enforcement agents can have an intimidating effect on voters, especially Black voters, and they have no role and no right to be inside our polling places,” Kristen Clarke, NAACP general counsel, said in a statement.

The Justice Department said in a court document that monitors aren’t allowed to have firearms and have been instructed not to interfere with voting and must dress in business casual clothing.

Senior Judge Reggie Walton, an appointee of President George W. Bush in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, held a hearing on Monday. The public docket indicated Walton would issue an order.

Alaska challenge tossed

Judge Sharon Gleason, an appointee of President Barack Obama in U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska, on Sunday dismissed a Justice Department lawsuit that preemptively sought to pause certification of the Senate race.

The DOJ wanted a certification pause if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan lost to Democrat Mary Peltola — and if Sullivan lost by less than the number of votes received by another candidate of the same name, Dan J. Sullivan.

The New York Times reported last week that Democrats worked to recruit Dan J. Sullivan, leading Trump to call for him and Peltola to be kicked out of the election. While Alaska election officials had initially tried to prevent Dan J. Sullivan from appearing on the ballot, the Alaska Supreme Court cleared his candidacy earlier this year.

The Justice Department’s lawsuit had also asked for an order requiring all ballots for Dan J. Sullivan be set aside for further investigation. Gleason gave little credence to the request and wrote that the Trump administration had offered no explanation for how it would work.

“The absence of any explanation from the United States as to how its requested relief could redress its alleged injury while simultaneously maintaining the secrecy of the ballot is telling,” Gleason wrote.

The Justice Department immediately appealed the decision to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The U.S. Department of Justice plans to send election monitors to every state ahead of Election Day, expanding a long-standing practice that’s spurred concern this year among Democrats and voting rights advocates because of President Donald Trump’s push to influence elections.

The Justice Department for decades has deployed monitors across the country to watch the voting process. During President Joe Biden’s administration, the DOJ sent monitors to 64 jurisdictions across 24 states for the 2022 midterm elections.

The 2026 monitoring program is larger, with the Justice Department announcing it will have a presence in all 50 states. DOJ spokesperson Kiersten Pels told States Newsroom on Monday that about 1,000 monitors will be involved but that the department won’t disclose the full list of monitored locations until Election Day — Nov. 3.

“Every monitor will merely observe and report any potential violations of federal law to the Department, which will be reviewed after Election Day,” Pels said in a statement.

Lawsuits prompt unease

While election monitors, who watch polling places and election officials for compliance with federal voting rights laws, have long been a feature of U.S. elections, the Trump administration’s extraordinary moves to assert federal authority over state-run elections have left many Democrats and even some Republicans uneasy about this year’s expansive effort.

The Justice Department has sued dozens of states in an attempt to force election officials to turn over voter lists that contain sensitive personal data, such as driver’s license and Social Security numbers. The DOJ has lost 27 cases so far, and won none.

Less than two weeks ago, the Justice Department sued California to block election officials from counting ballots from roughly 20,000 voters it says are suspected noncitizens. 

And on Friday, the DOJ sued Alaska to preemptively prevent the certification of its U.S. Senate election if the Republican incumbent loses by less than the number of votes received by another candidate of the same name, citing the potential for voter confusion.

But concerns about DOJ monitors began building in August after Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon, a Republican, expressed reservations about monitors, calling their actions “very odd” after DOJ personnel watched voting in the state’s primary election. 

Andrew Walchuk, senior policy director and counsel for voting & fair representation at the watchdog group Common Cause, told reporters last month that monitors in and of themselves are nothing new, pointing to the long history of the DOJ’s monitoring program.

“But with this administration, we will be watching their activity very closely,” Walchuk said.

1,000 monitors, 95,000 polling places

Election experts have emphasized that even with a 1,000 monitors, the Justice Department presence across the country will be far too small to interfere with voting on a wide scale. For example, the 2024 election included more than 95,000 polling places, according to survey data from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

“The math just ain’t mathing,” Harry Black, a senior counsel at the nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, said during a panel discussion on the midterms earlier this month at the University of Pittsburgh.

In early October, the NAACP sued the Justice Department for records about the election monitoring program. In their complaint, lawyers for the NAACP argued that the “unprecedented deployment” of federal officials could jeopardize the election and interfere with the right of voters to cast their ballots without intimidation.

U.S. District Court Judge Sparkle Sooknanan, an appointee of President Joe Biden in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., denied a request by the NAACP for an emergency order directing the DOJ to immediately begin producing records. The underlying lawsuit remains pending.

Local announcements of locations

While the full location list for the election monitors remains closely held, the Justice Department last week began notifying counties that will have monitors. In turn, some state and local election officials have announced where monitors will be present.

In Washington state, DOJ monitors will deploy to King County, which includes Seattle. In Oregon, they’ll be sent to the Portland area.

Salt Lake County in Utah will receive at least one monitor. Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, a Republican who has clashed with the Trump administration after she refused to hand over voter data, told reporters last week that the Justice Department offered assurances about how the monitors will act.

“They won’t be approaching voters. They won’t be wearing any sort of insignia,” Henderson said.

In Maine, DOJ monitors are expected to be present in Portland and Lewiston. Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat, has said her office “will monitor the monitors very carefully to ensure that they don’t cross any lines.”

Pels said all monitors must meet the same legal and ethical requirements, which includes not interfering in the voting process.

“Every monitor has the same role: observe for potential violations of federal law and report concerns to the Department, which the Department will review after Election Day and act where appropriate,” Pels said.

Reporting contributed by Maine Morning Star’s Lauren McCauley and Utah News Dispatch reporter Alixel Cabrera.

As President Donald Trump refuses to rule out taking extreme action in the midterm elections, voting rights advocates and civil rights leaders are bolstering their voter protection efforts in anticipation of possible federal interference.

The focus by activists comes amid uncertainty among advocates and election officials over what Trump may do before, during and after Election Day. Some organizations are preparing to deploy volunteers to the polls to help assure voters in places where fear of federal intimidation may run high.

On Tuesday, several groups — including the Save America Movement, the American Federation of Teachers labor union and the National Action Network — launched Vote Safe, an initiative that will put local volunteers at polling locations in areas where they say pressure on Black, Latino and Asian voters is highest. 

The program will include Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina and Ohio. The volunteers will document any intimidation and serve as a reassuring presence for voters, organizers said.

“The fear is the point and we must do something about it,” Mary Corcoran, executive director of the Save America Movement, a nonpartisan pro-democracy group, said on a call with reporters. “Left unaddressed, fear does the work of keeping people home without a single agent setting foot at a polling place.”

Volunteers will include clergy members, veterans, teachers and others trained to provide clear answers on voters’ rights, Corcoran said.

In Ohio, where Vote Safe will launch on the first day of early voting, Republican Sen. Jon Husted is facing former Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown in one of the most closely watched Senate races in the country. Springfield, Ohio, also has a large Haitian immigrant population that has been repeatedly attacked by Trump, who is seeking to deport them.

The Rev. Al Sharpton, a civil rights leader who founded the National Action Network, suggested on Tuesday’s press call that some Americans in Ohio fear they could also be detained or even deported by ICE because of their skin color.

“‘You don’t understand, any Black looks like a Haitian in Ohio,’” Sharpton said, recalling a previous conversation with a journalist in Ohio. “You’ve got to prove you were from Alabama, not Port-au-Prince, after you’re deported.”

ProPublica reported on Tuesday that more than 500 U.S. citizens have been detained by immigration agents during the second Trump administration. About a dozen citizens, mostly children, have been deported.

What Trump has said

Trump, who has long made false claims about stolen elections and voter fraud, has maintained ambiguity surrounding what election-related actions he may take after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked his plan to use the U.S. Postal Service to restrict mail ballots. Congress also didn’t pass the SAVE America Act, a measure he championed that would require voters to offer documentary proof of citizenship.

In a recent TIME magazine interview, Trump said he hadn’t thought of deploying Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, agents to the polls. 

But he also left open the possibility of declaring a national emergency, which legal experts say would give him no power over elections. Under the Constitution, states administer elections, not the federal government.

Earlier this year, Trump told reporters he would “do anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections.”

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin has said ICE agents can serve warrants at election sites, despite a ban on armed federal personnel at polling places. At the same time, DHS has denied any plans to target polling places.

DOJ election monitors

The Department of Justice’s plans to deploy 1,000 election monitors at polling places has also fueled concern among Democrats and voting rights advocates — and some Republicans. 

While the DOJ regularly dispatches monitors each election cycle, the scope of the effort and Trump’s history of pressuring election officials has led to unease about how the monitors will behave. 

Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon, a Republican, earlier this year expressed reservations about Justice Department monitors, calling their actions “very odd” after DOJ personnel watched voting in the state’s primary election. 

On Monday, the NAACP sued the Justice Department for records about its election monitor program, alleging the DOJ didn’t comply with Freedom of Information Act timelines.

“Americans deserve to know whether the Justice Department is abusing its law enforcement powers to the detriment of voters and the election officials tasked with running our elections,” Kristen Clarke, the NAACP’s general counsel, said in a statement.

Justice Department spokesperson ​​Kiersten Pels wrote in an email to States Newsroom that monitors comply with all legal and ethical requirements. Pels added that they don’t interfere with the voting process and that their work “is consistent with longstanding Department practice of monitoring elections for compliance with federal law.”

U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche dismissed concerns about the monitors in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” While confirming plans for about 1,000 monitors, he emphasized that the department sends out monitors every federal election.

“They’re not going to Republican states, they’re not going to Democrat states. They’re going to every state to make sure that our elections are carried out legally, fairly and appropriately,” Blanche said.

After Election Day

The preparations by civic groups also include post-election planning for potential disruptions to vote counting or attempts to overturn losses.

The FBI seized ballots from the 2020 election in Fulton County, Georgia, in January. The then-director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was present at the raid at Trump’s request, underscoring its importance to the president. 

The Justice Department also spent months seeking information on election workers in Fulton County during the 2020 election before a federal judge quashed the subpoena in July.

The raid raised questions among activists and election experts about whether federal law enforcement would seek search warrants to obtain ballots after Election Day.

Ballot seizures are a point of concern, said Andrew Walchuk, senior policy director and counsel for voting and fair representation at Common Cause, a voting rights group. The raid was “an alert” to election offices that a seizure is something they need to prepare for, Walchuk said.

“It is definitely something that groups across the country are ready for, that we’re watching,” Walchuk told reporters last week.

Like other groups, Common Cause’s election preparations include training a network of volunteers who can help voters and identify potential problems. In Texas alone, more than 400 volunteers are already, said Marliza Marin, Common Cause’s Texas program manager. 

“It’s kind of unheard of to have this many volunteers already trained,” Marin said.