Several Democratic states are moving to bar federal immigration agents from being near polling places and other election sites, amid persistent worries that President Donald Trump will use federal law enforcement or the military to disrupt the midterm elections.

Measures to restrict federal agents from operating at or near election-related locations have been offered in more than half a dozen states, according to a Stateline count. While the proposals vary, they broadly seek to combat the prospect of chaotic confrontations between federal agents and voters this November.

A federal law dating to the end of the Civil War already bans sending the military or other “armed men” to polling places, except to repel armed enemies of the United States. The U.S. Constitution also gives states — not the president or federal government — the responsibility for running elections.

But Trump’s calls to nationalize elections, his promise to impose voting restrictions with or without Congress, and his history of working to overturn the 2020 presidential election is prompting some Democratic state lawmakers to act. Adding to lawmakers’ fears is the FBI’s January seizure of ballots from the 2020 election in Fulton County, Georgia, and U.S. Department of Justice lawsuits against dozens of states for copies of their voter rolls that include sensitive personal information.

The president’s party typically loses ground in Congress in midterm elections. Given that, Democrats fear Trump is laying the groundwork to block or cast doubt on a losing outcome.

“When the president says he’s going to break the law, I actually believe him,” said California state Sen. Tom Umberg, a Democrat who has introduced legislation that would prohibit federal immigration enforcement within 200 feet of polling places. He said Trump’s call to “nationalize” elections was the “triggering event” that prompted him to offer the bill.

Legislation to restrict immigration enforcement or the presence of federal forces near polling places and other election sites has been offered or announced in California, Connecticut, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia and Washington. A bill has also been introduced in Kansas, which has a Democratic governor, but the measure is unlikely to pass in the Republican-controlled legislature.

The bills focus on immigration enforcement, but the New Mexico legislation would go further, prohibiting the military or any armed federal personnel from polling locations.

The Trump administration and its supporters have suggested that the president might order U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, to the polls. After former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in early February said ICE will surround polling places, White House press secretary Karolina Leavitt said she couldn’t guarantee an ICE agent wouldn’t be near a polling place

Trump allies have also circulated a draft executive order that Trump could sign declaring a national emergency and attempting to assert broad powers over elections, The Washington Post reported last week. Trump told reporters on Friday that he had never heard of the draft order.

But during a conference call last week for election officials from across the country, the Department of Homeland Security committed to not placing ICE agents at any polling places in 2026, according to both Republican and Democratic secretaries of state who were on the call.

Homeland Security told Stateline in a statement that ICE isn’t planning operations “targeting” polling places, but could arrest individuals if an active public safety threat endangered a polling location.

“There’s no reason for us to deploy to a polling facility,” ICE’s current leader, Todd Lyons, told Congress in February.

Democratic state lawmakers calling for election-related restrictions on ICE in state law say they don’t want to take any chances.

“I think this is just prudent, wise policy to do what we all know is right, which is to protect polling places,” said Virginia Democratic state Del. Katrina Callsen, the chief sponsor of a bill that would prohibit federal civil immigration enforcement within 40 feet of polling places and voting counting sites.

The New Mexico legislature in February passed a measure that largely mirrors restrictions in federal law against armed federal personnel at polling places. The bill is now before Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham.

The bill says officials generally cannot order or bring troops or other armed federal agents to polling places or parking areas for polling places beginning 28 days before Election Day, when early in-person voting begins. It also would prohibit officials from changing who is qualified to vote contrary to New Mexico law or from imposing election rules that conflict with state law. Violators would be guilty of a felony.

New Mexico lawmakers offered the legislation the day after Trump’s initial remarks about wanting to nationalize elections. New Mexico Democratic state Sen. Katy Duhigg, the bill’s lead sponsor, said she wanted a measure that wouldn’t run into issues with the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause, which says federal law supersedes state law.

“I think a lot of states, frankly, are trying to figure out what to do right now,” Duhigg said, adding that courts will likely be asked to sort through new state-level limits on federal forces. “This seems like a reasonable approach to try.”

Republican lawmakers opposed

Some Republican state lawmakers are dismissive of the Democratic measures, casting them as unnecessary.

“I just cannot imagine the president, as much as you might dislike him, ordering federal troops to seize New Mexico elections by armed force,” New Mexico Republican state Sen. William Sharer, the minority leader, said during debate. Sharer didn’t respond to an interview request from Stateline.

In Washington state, one bill would require local election officials to block anyone from accessing areas where ballots are processed or counted for the purposes of immigration enforcement. Law enforcement could be allowed access with a judicial warrant or court order, however.

Washington state Rep. Jim Walsh, a Republican who also chairs the state party, characterized the proposal as “fearmongering” and a solution in search of a problem — unless its supporters acknowledge that people in the country illegally are voting. And he claims Washington doesn’t have the authority to legally bar ICE from areas of an election office.

Washington Democratic state Sen. Drew Hansen, the bill’s lead sponsor, said election workers counting ballots deserve to be able to perform their task without interference from federal immigration authorities. Hansen noted that ICE “does not have a perfect track record, to say the least, of only detaining extremely dangerous, violent noncitizens.”

More than 170 U.S. citizens have been held by immigration agents during Trump’s second term, ProPublica reported in October. A December report by Democrats on the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations identified at least seven U.S. citizens who were held for more than 24 hours.

In Arizona, some Republicans want to encourage an ICE presence at the polls. In February, Republican state Sen. Jake Hoffman offered a bill that would require counties to sign an agreement with ICE to provide a federal law enforcement presence at polling places.

Hoffman didn’t respond to an interview request from Stateline. A scheduled committee hearing on the measure was canceled in February, likely killing the bill. Still, the underlying proposal could be resurrected, Arizona Mirror reported.

“Arizonans deserve to know that election laws are not just written in statute but actually enforced in practice,” Hoffman said in a news release.

Existing federal laws against federal election interference are specific and straightforward, said Sean Morales-Doyle, director of the Voting Rights and Elections program at the left-leaning Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. States such as Arizona don’t get a “free pass” to violate federal law, either, he said.

Options exist to hold people accountable under federal law, Morales-Doyle said. If ICE agents deployed to polling places, federal prosecutors would have five years to bring charges against ICE personnel under the statute of limitations. While the Justice Department under the Trump administration would be unlikely to bring charges, he noted, the time limit extends into the next presidential administration.

Still, Morales-Doyle said he understands why people are skeptical, given how ICE and other elements of the Trump administration have behaved.

“So it is, I think, important to think about what state legal mechanisms there are for holding people accountable,” he said.

Local enforcement

Some of the state legislative proposals would place local election workers on the front lines of resisting federal interference.

The Washington state measure would instruct multiple election workers, when possible, to document incidents in which they deny permission to enter areas that are off limits to immigration enforcement. The New Mexico bill would allow county clerks and voters who experienced intimidation to sue over alleged violations, in addition to state officials.

The California legislation goes perhaps the furthest in empowering local election officials. It would allow county election officials to keep polls open if they determine that voting was disrupted because of violations of a ban on federal immigration enforcement nearby.

Some local election officials appear hesitant to discuss the proposals and whether they are preparing for the possibility of federal interference. The president of the California Association of County Clerks and Elected Officials and the clerks chair of New Mexico Counties, a statewide advocacy group for county officials, didn’t respond to requests for interviews. The Washington State Association of County Auditors declined to comment.

More broadly, other election officials have said the possibility of federal interference is informing their preparations for the midterm elections. Scott McDonell, the Democratic clerk of Dane County, Wisconsin, which includes Madison, told Stateline in February that while Trump’s desire to “nationalize” elections isn’t possible under the Constitution, he is paying attention to agencies that answer to Trump.

“What does the president actually control? The FBI, National Guard, ICE, DOJ in general. That’s far more concerning,” McDonell said. (State national guards can be federalized by the president.)

Barbara Richardson Crouch, the Republican registrar of voters in the Town of Sprague, Connecticut, said she prefers no law enforcement at polling places — whether local, state or federal.

In Connecticut, legislators plan to offer a measure to restrict federal immigration enforcement within 250 feet of a polling place or other election site. Crouch, who has been involved in election administration for nearly two decades, said she has long dealt with concerns surrounding law enforcement at voting sites, but that those fears in the past centered on state and local police.

Crouch said a state trooper typically comes through her polling place in the early morning as election workers are setting up, and then again when polls close. Law enforcement is on call, but Crouch said she believes that if someone sees law enforcement, it sends a message that the area isn’t safe.

“I personally have never liked police at election places, even local police,” Crouch said.

Stateline reporter Jonathan Shorman can be reached at jshorman@stateline.org.

“This is in response to the recent arrests of four local community members, which have impacted not only multiple families but also many others throughout the surrounding region. We are demanding details about the nature of the advance notice of federal officers used to notify the Eau Claire (County) Sheriff’s Department, as well as body cam footage from the officers on the scene,” said Gerardo Licon, a member of the advocacy group El Centro de Conexion de Chippewa Valley.

Licon was speaking to a group of roughly 100 at an ICE Out Now! demonstration near the Altoona City Police Department on Saturday afternoon, Feb. 21.

The protest, organized by area Chippewa Valley advocacy groups, was responding  to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents detaining four people on Tuesday, Feb. 17.

The coalition is questioning the level of cooperation between local law enforcement, including the Eau Claire County Sheriff’s Department and the city of Altoona Police Department, with ICE, as well as the narrative offered by Eau Claire County Sheriff Dave Riewestahl about what transpired on Feb.17

Riewestahl said in a press release late Feb. 17 that his office was contacted by ICE agents who said they would be at a construction site in the city of Altoona, near the city of Eau Claire, to arrest a suspect who had allegedly assaulted a law enforcement officer.

Riewestahl later told the Examiner the construction site was off 9 Mile Creek Road, just over a quarter mile from the Altoona Elementary School.

The Examiner heard concerns expressed by local residents that the enforcement action occurred in the afternoon, near dismissal time at the school, but in a voicemail to the Examiner, Altoona School Superintendent Dr. Heidi Elopaulos said the school district had heard no concerns.

“The law enforcement activity that occurred in our community on Feb. 17 had no involvement with and no impact on the School District of Altoona,” she said.

After ICE agents attempted to arrest the suspect, Riewestahl said, four individuals fled the construction site, and one was apprehended.

The sheriff said three who fled the scene entered a residence in the town of Washington, confronted a homeowner, then went into the garage and barricaded themselves inside. The homeowner then locked the door between the house and the garage.

Riewestahl said his office was called to address a criminal trespass to a dwelling, and then county deputies requested assistance from  Altoona police.

Upon the request of the homeowner, the sheriff said, his officers entered the home and attempted to gain voluntary compliance with the three individuals in the garage, but when verbal requests failed, the officers used pepperballs, and the three surrendered.

None of the three were charged with criminal trespass, said the sheriff, because the homeowner didn’t want to press charges.

The three individuals were subsequently turned over to ICE agents.

“In talking with ICE, they said they had the authority to take them in custody for immigration activity, so we turned them over to immigration and immigration took all four of those individuals,” Riewestahl told the Examiner.

In January, after ICE agents were spotted  at the Eau Claire County Courthouse, Riewestahl told local media that his department’s policy manual for field services (patrol) and security services (jail) regarding immigration status directs patrol officers not to detain anyone accused of a “civil  violation of federal immigration laws or related civil warrants,” and that the jail is only allowed to hold individuals who have “been charged with a federal crime,” or have been issued “a warrant, affidavit of probable cause or removal order.”

Several at the demonstration said that earlier in the year, both the sheriff’s department and the Altoona Police Department had said they would not cooperate with ICE.

It is not clear if there was any level of cooperation between the two local law enforcement agencies and ICE other than possibly the sheriff allowing ICE to take the three whom local officers had removed from the garage.

Mireya Sigala, another advocate with El Centro, introduced a man she said was the brother of one of the three. The man was not identified, and he spoke in Spanish, which was translated by Licon.

“Thank you so much for the support you’re giving us, the immigrants,” he said. “Supposedly, they’re looking for criminals, but the criminals aren’t working, and our mistake was to go out and work.”

The man said his brother had never committed a crime and did not  owe anyone money.

“I felt terrible when he called and told me, ‘ICE is here, help me,’” he said. “I felt like trash. I felt like impotent that I couldn’t help him. I didn’t know what to do. There was a woman who gave him refuge in the garage, and I really appreciate that. To my understanding, after that they forcefully took them out of there.”

The brother’s version of events of a woman offering “refuge” appears to contradict the sheriff’s version that the homeowner complained of the three people trespassing  in the Town of Washington home.

Licon also said the advocates are challenging the account offered in the Feb. 17 press release and demanded that “a public statement from both Eau Claire sheriff’s office and Altoona Police Department correcting false statements and the narrative that was published on the news stories after the event, accountability and apology for working with ICE after explicitly stating they wouldn’t do that.”

The Examiner reached out to Sheriff Riewestahl for a response.

The organizers of the event, Licon said, are stressing a clear message to local law enforcement that it “exists to serve and protect the communities in which they operate.”

“They (organizers) argue the cooperation with federal immigration officers erodes trust, discourages residents from reporting crimes, and undermines public safety for everyone,” said Licon. “Our message is simple: law enforcement should be focused on protecting local community members. They work for us, not ICE.”

He added, “Public safety depends on trust, and that trust is compromised when local public safety agencies are seen to be actively assisting federal immigration enforcement officers. Given the lack of dignity and the dehumanization that immigration officers and federal agencies have demonstrated across the country toward law-abiding community members, we cannot allow these unaccountable and undertrained federal agents anywhere near our community.”

Licon also said the advocates have a list of three other demands:

* ICE and immigration officers leave Eau Claire County.

* Release any person arrested without a corresponding legal warrant signed by a judge, and a proof of a warrant used for arrest.

* That both the city police and county sheriff respond to records requests, specifically how agencies were notified by ICE, decisions made to collaborate with ICE, and body camera footage.

None of the four detained Feb. 17 were sent to the Eau Claire County Jail. The man who identified himself as the  brother of one of the three taken Feb. 17 said his brother had been taken to “Bloomington,” presumably Bloomington, Minnesota, where federal immigration offices are located.

Denise Bustanante, another advocate, said if the sheriff’s office doesn’t know who ICE was originally intending to arrest, nor the immigration status of those detained on Feb. 17, then it is possible that ICE had detained U.S. citizens.

“For all we know, those four people could be U.S. citizens in ICE detention right now,” she said.

Dang Yang, a resident for 22 years whose parents came as refugees from Laos to the U.S.  in 1979, recounted how a local Hmong man was detained by ICE for over an hour even though the man is a legal citizen.

“On Monday, Jan. 5, a local Hmong man from our community was detained at his place of employment by ICE in Eau Claire,” said Yang. “He was handcuffed; he was questioned, and even after presenting his valid Wisconsin driver’s license to ICE agents, they spent nearly an hour interrogating him. They asked him about his citizenship over and over again. In addition to that, they also attempted to interrogate him about what he knew regarding the whereabouts of any undocumented Hmong community members in the area. He was finally released after the hour-long interrogation. But the arrest is never the point. The arrest is never the point. Because it’s the impact of the intimidation and the impact of the harassment that results in people hiding away, people afraid to go to the grocery store. People are afraid to talk to their neighbors, afraid to speak up when something is wrong, afraid to be seen and deathly afraid to be heard.”

Yang said his parents told him that back in Southeast Asia, they didn’t talk to the police because of fear of intimidation, and now he sees the same type of intimidation being used by ICE.

“Growing up, they would tell me how lucky we were to have police that were relatively helpful, to have a local government that was relatively competent compared to what they had known in their home country,” said Yang, “But today, the echoes of the past return, and we still see numerous examples of federal law enforcement being just as corrupt, just as unaccountable and just as problematic with their interactions, because they could lead to people being disappeared.This is not the exception of what we have seen over the last year. This is the rule. This is why we’re angry when we see law enforcement side by side with ICE. The association itself, without any details, erodes the trust that my parents so desperately sought when they left their homes in Southeast Asia. But me, today, I cannot deny that I’m afraid, but despite that, I refuse to hide away.”

State Rep.  Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) expressed  his support for the local immigrant community saying, “Nobody in the Chippewa Valley ever has to prove their humanity in order to deserve to be safe in our community.”

He added, “I just want to thank you all for the courage that you are demonstrating, leaning into our long and storied history here of true working-class solidarity. Courage is contagious when you demonstrate it by standing up for all of our neighbors, including our immigrant neighbors. You are sharing that courage with the people around you, and while we have that long history of working-class solidarity, ICE is not some time-honored institution with this storied history in the Chippewa Valley. It is less than 30 years old, and it serves no purpose other than to be the sharp and violent edge of Trump’s fascism and authoritarianism, and so I am only here to say, I see you, I hear you, I appreciate you. I encourage you to continue.”

This story was updated at 10:04 a.m. on Monday, Feb. 23.

A cheesehead placed at the Minneapolis memorial of Green Bay native Alex Pretti, who was killed by federal agents Jan. 24. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

BALDWIN — Hours after White House border czar Tom Homan announced Wednesday morning that the Trump administration would be pulling 700 immigration agents out of Minnesota, agents crossed the St. Croix River to conduct a number of raids in the Twin Cities exurban communities of Hudson and Baldwin, Wisconsin. 

Those operations included the arrest of immigrants at the St. Croix County Courthouse in Hudson and a Mexican restaurant in Baldwin. In prior weeks federal immigration agents have regularly crossed the river, arresting people working at small manufacturing operations and gas stations, ranging as far east as Eau Claire. 

While Wisconsin has seen an increase in immigration enforcement since President Donald Trump took office last year — as well some high profile cases such as the arrest of a migrant at the Milwaukee County Courthouse that sparked the federal felony charges against former Judge Hannah Dugan — the level of ICE action in the state has been lower than in the neighboring states of Illinois and Minnesota, where the Department of Homeland Security launched massive operations targeting migrants in Chicago and Minneapolis/St. Paul. 

Ben Nelson, a St. Paul resident who serves as the pastor of Zion Lutheran Church in Woodville and works as a coach on the track team at Baldwin-Woodville High School, said that when students returned to classes after winter break, as many as 50 households in the school district had seen at least one parent taken by federal agents. 

On Wednesday, several ICE agents arrived at the St. Croix County Courthouse and went inside to arrest immigrants who were in  the building for court hearings.

Agents also raided Rancho Loco Mexican restaurant in Baldwin, where four members of the staff were arrested. 

“Within the last 48 hours, we probably had another 10 people taken from Baldwin,” Kimberly Solberg, a Baldwin resident who has been involved in local support networks, said Wednesday evening. “We are a small town, but they’re still doing the raids here, taking two, three, five, eight people at a time.” 

In the shadow of the Minnesota crackdown

Since ICE increased its Minnesota presence in December, these Wisconsin communities have been living in the shadow of the chaos caused by the immigration enforcement surge across the border. Residents work, shop and get their health care in Minnesota — including at the Veterans Affairs hospital where Green Bay native Alex Pretti worked before he was killed by federal agents Jan. 24. 

While the presence of ICE in the Twin Cities has galvanized resistance in the largely blue urban area, the operations in western Wisconsin are deeply dividing residents in a solidly Republican county. 

“The vitriol is so so thick, and the divide is so deep that people on one side, in the local minority, who are trying to do what they can to protect their neighbors, to support their neighbors, or just call for calmness and peace — which even calling for empathy, calmness and peace is radical leftist nonsense at this point,” Solberg said. “They’re terrified. People speak in code, there’s like signals, winks and nods. Everybody tiptoes around to suss out whether or not the person they’re talking to is safe because they’re so scared of how people react.”

Nelson, the Woodville track coach and pastor, said the lack of trust in the community is affecting how people are responding.

“There’s some really just strong opinions … it’s sort of difficult to know who you can trust, because there is a significant amount of people who believe that ICE is operating lawfully and doing the right thing, and will support them in those efforts,” Nelson said. “So honestly, I think we’re just still figuring it out as we go, figuring out how to speak and what we can do.”

Some networks that are helping western Wisconsin’s current immigrant communities were established when Hmong and Vietnamese refugees first arrived in the region after the Vietnam War, according to River Falls resident Ellie Richards. 

“There is a caring community here who is trying to provide the support we feel like these wonderful souls need,” Richards said. “We view them as an asset to our community. None of us feel the least bit threatened by their presence, despite what the federal government may try to tell us.” 

But the best way to respond has been unclear because of the political divide in the rural communities and the fact that there are fewer people nearby to rush to the scene when immigration agents are conducting an arrest.

On the evening of Jan. 28, about 50 residents of Baldwin met in sub-zero temperatures at a park to hold a candlelight vigil for Pretti and Renee Good. Residents of the small rural community lamented that ICE’s presence in St. Croix County has caused immigrant-owned businesses to close — including the local Mexican grocery store, Thai and Indian restaurants. 

Other area residents have been driving across the border to join Minnesota’s protests against the federal immigration enforcement crackdown. 

‘We don’t have the numbers and support’

In the Twin Cities, the presence of ICE agents often sparks an immediate response from neighbors who come outside to observe and make noise in an effort to deter an arrest. In rural Wisconsin communities, there are often fewer people in the immediate area who can respond in the same way. 

Even when responders arrive on the scene, they often don’t have enough people to feel comfortable standing up to the federal agents. 

“We don’t have the numbers and support, at least not in any way organized like they do in the Cities,” Solberg said. “None of the whistles, none of the honking or shouting. It’s intimidating, because if you don’t have a big group, we’ve all seen the videos of the attitude of some of these ICE agents, specifically that video where the agent tells the protester, ‘You raise your voice, I’ll erase your voice.’ It’s very clear that there’s an attitude that if you resist us in any way, we will come after you, whether we legally can or not.” 

St. Croix residents have joined group chats on encryption apps such as Signal and taken observer training offered by Twin Cities-based immigrant advocacy groups in Hudson and River Falls. But often, immigrants are arrested and swept away by federal agents before help can arrive, meaning that the support networks are largely left to help families handle the effects afterwards. 

Neighbors are bringing groceries to families staying home out of fear of arrest and providing rides to undocumented immigrants, who are legally barred from obtaining Wisconsin driver’s licenses. Residents say they are providing this type of help to immigrants whether they have legal status to be in this country or not, because of ICE’s history of arresting people based on their appearance. 

Strained relationship with local police

The presence of ICE in the community is straining the relationship between residents and local law enforcement. Several residents have complained that the Baldwin Police Department is at the scene when ICE conducts operations in the community. The St. Croix County Sheriff’s Department is not a participant in ICE’s 287(g) program granting deputies some civil immigration authority and the department policy states that victims and witnesses of crimes will not be turned in to federal authorities. But the policy states that the department can notify ICE about undocumented immigrants who are held in the county jail for other crimes. 

Solberg, who said she comes from a law enforcement family, said the perceived assistance local cops are giving ICE is harming their relationship with the community. 

“I have personally seen, with my own eyes, I have seen Baldwin P.D. conferencing, standing with ICE immediately prior to ICE raiding an apartment complex,” she said. “I want to give police every benefit of the doubt, because I’ve lived in places that have bad police, and Baldwin police is very community oriented, but also I’m not going to be willfully blind when so many people are saying that they have personally seen Baldwin P.D. working with ICE, assisting in detention, assisting in action, actively assisting in actions.” 

“The worst is it’s the perception, the perception in the community, for sure, across the board, among the ICE supporters and the ICE detractors, the perception in the community is that all the P.D. is working with ICE,” she continued. “Which, for people who are scared, who are legal migrants or possibly illegal immigrants, the police are supposed to be there to protect the community, and those entire groups of people do not feel safe with the law enforcement.”

But Baldwin Police Chief Kevin Moore denied that his officers were cooperating with federal agents.

“I am concerned that members of the immigrant community may feel hesitant to report crimes or contact law enforcement due to perceptions about immigration enforcement,” he said in an email. “That concern is taken seriously. The Baldwin Police Department is committed to serving everyone in our community, and we want residents to know that contacting our department for help does not place them at risk of immigration enforcement. As a small, community-focused department, our officers live and work in and around Baldwin and care deeply about the trust of the people we serve. While we occasionally encounter federal agents in the course of routine patrol or unrelated law enforcement activity, as we do with many agencies, these encounters are unplanned and do not reflect coordinated operations or cooperation related to immigration enforcement. Our intent is to maintain open communication with community members, address concerns directly, and ensure that Baldwin remains a safe place for everyone who lives, works, or visits here.”

ICE did not respond to a request for comment.