State Democratic officials are preparing for chaos at the polls this November, as President Donald Trump casts doubt on election security and pushes for more federal involvement in local voting. 

“We’re no longer talking about hypothetical situations,” said Nick Brown, Washington state’s Democratic attorney general, noting the president’s push to nationalize election administration and to question the integrity of upcoming elections.

Brown is among the many Democratic state officials raising alarms over how Trump may seek to interfere with or challenge the results of November’s midterms. At stake is not only whether Republicans will maintain their grip on Congress, but also the control of state legislatures across the country. Democratic gains at either the state or national levels could provide a new check on Trump, who has sought to significantly expand executive power in his second term.

State lawmakers have introduced new legislation this year with the aim of protecting polling places this November. And behind closed doors, Democratic attorneys general and local election officials have sought to anticipate and prepare for ways the federal government could interject itself into local elections.

In recent months, Democratic attorneys general have been meeting to prepare for worst-case scenarios — including the possibility of federal immigration officers patrolling polling locations or the FBI visiting county election offices. Those AGs are gearing up to immediately fight potential intimidation or interference efforts in court, Brown said, and are working to educate local election administrators on basics of election law.

“Absent some very unusual circumstances, you can’t send the military to polling locations just to hang out. You can’t do those sorts of things,” he said.

The White House did not respond to Stateline’s questions. Republican state officials told Stateline they will respect voting laws and the outcomes of local races — no matter how the president reacts. Some Republicans have opposed Trump’s efforts to restrict mail-in voting and resisted requests for private voter data.

Brown said he’s less worried about a White House effort to cancel or attack the legitimacy of elections across the country. Rather, he fears a more targeted effort to interfere with or challenge results in a few states that could determine the balance of federal power.

The president still refuses to acknowledge his 2020 electoral defeat, and Brown noted some fellow election deniers now hold power in state and local governments. At least 25 county election officials who align with the broader election-denier movement have taken office across the country since the last federal election in 2024, according to a recent New York Times analysis.

“That is what worries me, is a half a dozen local elected officials saying I have doubts about the election because the president said there was something shady, and I’m not going to certify it,” Brown said. “And we’re just in a chaos moment. And I think that’s a very real possibility.”

He added: “The struggle I have often in this job, and particularly on this issue, is raising the alarm for people about these possibilities, while not sounding like an alarmist, but I think we really need to in this circumstance.”

Utah Republican Gov. Spencer Cox said elections have always had “some issues,” but he said there’s no evidence of anything coming close to major voter violations of election laws in the recent past. He said he expected Republican and Democratic secretaries of state to continue their long tradition of conducting elections with integrity.

“I feel confident in the election system in this country, and I hope that politicians will be responsible,” he told Stateline, “that you’ll win the right way, and there’s a right way to lose, too, and I hope we’ll see more of that.” 

Election officials preparing

Midterms generally favor the party that doesn’t control the White House, but this cycle looks particularly competitive for Democrats as the president’s popularity sinks and consumer angst grows over high prices. 

In New Hampshire, both Republican-controlled legislative chambers are considered competitive this November, along with key U.S. House and Senate races. 

New Hampshire Republican Secretary of State David Scanlan said voters in his state generally trust local election officials to administer and count ballots. And he said the Trump administration would have to “have facts” to refute any unfavorable results.

“The results are going to speak for themselves,” Scanlan told Stateline. “And the results are factual.”

Scanlan has heard concerns about the prospects of federal agents showing up at the polls, but said he has no indication that will actually occur. While federal officials could arrive unannounced, he said he’d expect some kind of communication from Washington.

“At this point, if something were to happen, we would be prepared for it. I won’t say what that preparation is at the moment, but when you conduct an election you have to be ready for whatever gets thrown at you, whether it’s a fire in the polling place, or really bad weather, or some type of natural disaster. We prepare for those things.”

Katy Owens Hubler, director of elections and redistricting at the National Conference of State Legislatures, said local election officials have spent months running through tabletop exercises about all manner of potential disruptions, including the potential for federal involvement. 

“There is more rhetoric coming from the federal government than we have typically seen,” she said. 

While federal law prohibits ordering armed forces to polling places in most circumstances, lawmakers in multiple states this year introduced and passed legislation to prevent the presence of immigration officers or troops at voting locations, according to NCSL tracking.

Democratic governors in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Virginia signed new laws this year to limit law enforcement and military presence at voting sites and ensure more protections against voter intimidation.  

Last month, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said they were not planning an aggressive campaign at voting sites. In a statement to States Newsroom, the agency said it conducts “intelligence-driven targeted enforcement” that could bring officers to polling places if they were endangered by a public safety threat.

“ICE is not planning operations targeting polling locations,” the statement said. 

Broad election concerns

Many Republican lawmakers have embraced the president’s push to purge noncitizens from voting rolls. Experts say noncitizen registration and voting, already illegal under federal law, are rare. But since 2018, 15 states have adopted constitutional amendments to verify citizenship status, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. And several states have passed similar laws this year.

Those include a Mississippi law signed in April that requires election officials to verify proof of citizenship with documents such as birth certificates and passports when registering voters — which raised major concerns from voting rights advocates about restricting voting access for citizens without the proper documentation. 

Republican state Sen. Jeremy England, who sponsored that measure, said he sought to balance election security against voting access. He said media attention of even one case of a noncitizen voting in an election can cast doubt on the entire election system.

“At least the last couple of presidential elections have really led to a lot more questions,” he said, “and a lot of I would say probably a lot less confidence by the people.” 

Still, England rejected Trump’s call for the federal government to take over elections. The U.S. Constitution grants states primary responsibility for election administration.

“This idea of federalizing the election system, I don’t think the people of Mississippi would support that,” England said. “And we’re a red state with a Republican president.”

In July, Trump raised the alarm over election security in a primetime address from the White House. The president said Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and some other groups could compromise the country’s election infrastructure. Without evidence, Trump cast doubt on the integrity of the Los Angeles mayoral race and the state’s recent gubernatorial race. 

And in an interview with a conservative commentator this week, the president did not rule out declaring a national security emergency and federalizing control over November’s elections. 

England was among a bipartisan group of state leaders who discussed election preparations at last month’s National Conference of State Legislatures summit in Chicago. Joining him on a panel discussion was Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat.

Fontes urged state leaders to exercise more self-discipline when talking about and regulating elections.

“This should not be a partisan issue. That’s the hill that I’m willing to die on,” he said during that panel.

If states want to beef up election integrity, Fontes said lawmakers should provide local election officials with more funding to improve security — rather than making it more difficult to vote. And he held up the right to vote as among the most sacrosanct in society, giving ordinary people their constitutional right to check government power.

“That’s the real issue here,” he said. “The one chance citizens get, the one chance the governed get to keep us in our place, is being the most heavily regulated.”

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org.

Following a string of special election victories, Democrats have a path to flip several Republican-held legislative chambers and break GOP supermajorities in states across the country this November.

High prices and overall voter dissatisfaction with Washington have put control of the U.S. House and Senate in play this year — a dynamic that has trickled down, with heightened Democratic enthusiasm in many state contests.

“For the most part the Republicans are kind of playing defense more than offense,” said Katy Owens Hubler, director of elections and redistricting at the National Conference of State Legislatures. 

Midterm elections generally favor the party that doesn’t control the White House. Still, it’s unlikely Democrats can capture the majority in states: GOP lawmakers currently hold nearly 55% of the nation’s 7,386 state legislative seats. 

That gives Republicans control in 28 state legislatures and Democrats control in 18, while three states have divided control of chambers, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. NCSL is eyeing 10 Republican-held chambers, four Democratic-held chambers and the tied state House in Minnesota for potential flips in control in November.

“My feeling generally is that it is going to be a good year for Democrats,” Owens Hubler said, “but it’s not going to be a blowout year.”

Wins in some states could deliver Democrats total control of state government — both legislative chambers and the governor, known as a trifecta — making it much easier to pass progressive legislation. In other states, weakening Republican majorities or breaking veto-proof supermajorities would make it easier for Democrats to object to GOP policies.

Since President Donald Trump’s second term began, Democrats have flipped a dozen seats in special elections in Arkansas, Iowa, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Texas, according to tracking by the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, which works to elect Democrats at the state level. They also flipped another 18 seats in last year’s general elections in New Jersey and Virginia. 

Republicans have not flipped a single Democratic legislative seat.

“2026 is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to fundamentally transform state legislative power,” said Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee. 

The committee is touting record numbers of Democratic candidates running for office in some states and has announced plans to spend a record $50 million on state legislative races this year, with aims of flipping more than 650 legislative seats. And just as in 2024, the state of the economy — and ever-rising prices — are proving a central campaign message. 

In Michigan, defending their state Senate majority and winning control of the state House would give Democrats a trifecta. They would need to flip four Republican-held House seats to do so.

Michigan Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks said she’s confident her party will maintain or even grow its Senate majority. The House will be a “tougher lift,” she said, but the party’s chances look good now.

“I feel very confident that we will be working with a Democratic legislature in both chambers next term,” she said.

Following months of GOP obstruction in the House, Democratic control of both chambers would reverse the current gridlock in Lansing. Brinks, who is term-limited, said she expects a Democratic trifecta will focus on the issues that matter to Michiganders, including regulations on data centers, childcare accessibility and affordability. 

“There are things that we know we could do that make people’s lives easier and more affordable,” she said. “So I think that in general you’ll see us try to tackle those things.”

Nationwide, Republicans have acknowledged growing voter frustrations over affordability while also arguing voters should support them for their work to redraw congressional districts. 

Set off by a White House push to give Republicans more seats in the U.S. House, 10 states have completed middecade redistricting — a phenomenon unseen since the 1800s.

Earlier this month, the Republican State Leadership Committee, which works to elect GOP state legislators, highlighted the party’s redistricting successes and underscored that current races for statehouse control will determine which party draws future maps.

In a statement to Stateline, Committee President Edith Jorge-Tuñón said Democrats can brag all they want about fundraising success, “but no amount of cash changes the fact that their party is being pulled further left by the socialist wing calling the shots.”

“We know Democrats and their national allies will continue to pour millions into state legislative races because they understand what’s at stake: the legislators elected in 2026 will shape redistricting and the balance of power for years to come.”

‘Things are looking really good’

In Iowa, Democrats flipped two state Senate seats in special elections last year to break the GOP supermajority, leaving Republicans with a 33-17 majority in the upper chamber. 

Democrats hope to deprive Republicans of winning back that supermajority and to break the supermajority in the state House in November. It’s especially high stakes this cycle as polling has shown a very competitive race for governor, with Democratic State Auditor Rob Sand ahead of Republican Zach Lahn in some tracking.  

Iowa hasn’t had a Democratic governor since 2011.

“From my perspective right now, assuming we continue to do the work and we raise the money we need to, things are looking really good,” said Democratic state Sen. Janice Weiner, the minority leader. 

Depriving Republicans of a veto-proof supermajority would give a potential Democratic governor much more power, Weiner said. And the more Democrats gain, the more they can challenge  the policies of the GOP, which has enjoyed control of both chambers and the governor’s office for the past decade.

Senate Democrats have already used their newly won power by rejecting gubernatorial appointments, including a high-profile nomination for the leader of the state’s Health and Human Services Department.

Success in November could position Democrats to further contest the state Senate in 2028, when they could conceivably tie with a 25-25 split with Republicans, she said.

“It’s an accountability issue,” Weiner said. “You don’t have to be in the majority to start being a player.”

In a statement, Iowa Republican House Speaker Pat Grassley acknowledged the uphill battle that midterms can present for incumbents. But he said Republicans have faced similar pressures before, particularly in the 2020 election, and have only grown their House majority in Des Moines.

Republicans currently hold 67 of 100 Iowa House seats, all of which are up for election this year. Democrats only need to flip one seat to end the Republican House supermajority. 

“We have a lot of territory to defend, including several districts that historically voted for Democrats. Our success in these areas isn’t a fluke,” Grassley’s statement said. “With our battle-tested incumbents and a dynamic slate of hardworking candidates, we are in a strong position in every corner of the state.”

What’s at stake

In this year’s legislative special elections, Democrats have overperformed general election outcomes by a median of 10.4 points compared with how their districts voted in 2024 elections, according to government relations and lobbying firm MultiState. If Democrats maintain that kind of performance through November, the firm said, it could result in one of the largest wave elections in recent history. 

But special elections are not necessarily predictive of general elections, said Chris Cooper,  a professor of political science and public affairs at Western Carolina University in Cullowhee, North Carolina. 

North Carolina Democrats are aiming to prevent a House Republican supermajority and break the Senate GOP supermajority — which would require flipping just one seat. 

“I think breaking the supermajority does seem very much in reach,” Cooper said. “Getting the majority in the Senate isn’t going to happen unless we have a political earthquake the likes of which we haven’t seen in many decades.”

Increasing their numbers in the legislature would greatly increase the power of Democratic Gov. Josh Stein, who has seen a dozen of his vetoes overridden by the GOP-controlled legislature. Among other issues, those overrides have allowed laws to be enacted punishing so-called sanctuary cities and eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion policies from public education. 

“It’s extremely consequential,” Cooper said. “It doesn’t mean that Democrats are going to be able to do what they want, but it does mean they’re going to be able to stop the Republicans from doing what they want.”

For Democrats, statehouse races provide a critical opportunity to oppose policies enacted by the federal government’s Republican trifecta. 

“I think part of it is that people are waking up to the power that states have always had,” said Andrew Grunwald, vice president of political strategy at The States Project, an organization working to help Democrats gain power in states. 

State lawmakers who win election this year will have a huge impact on future congressional races as states continue to redraw U.S. House maps. But Grunwald said states also have the ability to immediately legislate on affordability issues that are top of mind for voters.

“When you look at who is passing laws that impact your everyday life, it’s your state lawmakers,” he said.

That’s particularly true in states with split partisan governance, including Arizona, Michigan and Wisconsin.

He also pointed to Pennsylvania, where Democrats control the state House but Republicans control the Senate. That divide has left hundreds of Democratic bills to die in the upper chamber. Winning a Senate majority there would require flipping three seats but could have a major impact on what legislation ultimately becomes signed by Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro. 

While the national environment looks favorable now, Grunwald acknowledged things can change quickly.

“We need to be doing the work now,” he said. “…If we’re not doing the work, voters will recognize that and if we’re meeting voters where they are and responding to their concerns they will recognize that as well.”

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org.