Can Trump cancel or postpone the 2026 midterm elections?

No. 

Federal law mandates that the general election take place the first Tuesday after the first Monday in even numbered years, meaning that Election Day is established by law, for both Presidential and Congressional elections. It would take an act of Congress to change the date; the President has no authority to order that an election be canceled or postponed.

Primaries and elections for state offices are a slightly different story. Because it’s logical, cost effective, and efficient, most states hold their general elections on the same date as federal elections, but still the day is determined by law. Primary dates are also written into each state’s election code, and can only be altered through legislation (as happened in Pennsylvania in 2020), though in some cases state parties can decide on the rules of primaries (as happened in Texas this year). 

Though less relevant for this question, it is worth noting that there are also federal laws that govern special elections for Congressional seats, guidance for extending or postponing voting when necessary in cases of emergency, and state laws that determine when and how to hold municipal elections. The important thing to remember is that it is a combination of governors, state legislatures, the courts, and potentially Congress that can make decisions in these scenarios, never the president.

Can Trump legally “nationalize” our elections?

No.  

The U.S. Constitution explicitly gives states the authority to determine the “Times, Places and Manner” to run federal elections and carefully limits federal involvement in election administration. Because each state has its own set of laws and policies, our federalized, decentralized system of election administration means there is not really anything to “nationalize.” That doesn’t mean that there is no role for the federal government — the Founders gave Congress the power to make and change election laws — primarily for federal elections. At certain times in American history, the federal government has had to step in to protect voters and make the process more fair and efficient (see: the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act, among others).

President Trump has issued two executive orders purporting to outline new rules and guidelines for elections, but like any executive order (EO), these have to be able to hold up in court. A March 2025 EO on elections has largely been struck down. The second elections EO, issued at the end of March 2026, has now been blocked by two separate federal courts, which held that the Constitution gives the states — not the president — authority over elections. The administration has appealed. The law is very clear that the president has no authority to mandate how states should administer elections, and so far, the courts have ruled accordingly. Significant changes at the federal level would have to come from Congress or a specific agency — never the president.  

Even in cases of national emergencies, while the president has temporary access to 130 emergency powers, these authorities are limited to specific areas, such as aspects of foreign policy and public health. No emergency power exists that would explicitly give the president control over elections. None of the emergency powers that Congress has pre-approved would give President Trump the ability to lawfully postpone or cancel elections, ban mail-in voting, send armed federal agents to polling locations (unless “necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States.”), or otherwise “nationalize” election administration. 

Any attempt by the president to “take over the voting” would be illegal and signals a politically-motivated attempt to expand and entrench his own power. 

For more on the emergency powers and federal overreach:

• Presidential emergency powers, explained | Protect Democracy 
• No, the president can’t ban mail voting | Protect Democracy

If President Trump could “nationalize” elections, what might he do with them? 

The Trump administration gave the world a preview of its anti-voter agenda in a March 2025 executive order (EO) and in a second elections-related EO in March 2026. Many of the provisions in both EOs are unconstitutional and violate both state and federal election laws. Trump has made it clear that his top priorities for the 2026 midterm elections include:  

1. Eliminating or restricting voting-by-mail. In the 2024 election, nearly a quarter of voters cast their ballots by mail. President Trump has repeatedly said he wants to ban most mail-in voting, restricting access to the ballot box for millions of Americans. Courts have blocked the administration’s attempt to restrict mail voting through executive action; in Watson, the Supreme Court also ruled for states on counting timely-postmarked ballots
2. Eliminating or restricting the use of voting machines. Machine counts have been proven time and again to be far more accurate than hand counts. Voting machines are never connected to the internet and undergo rigorous checks to ensure that they are tamper-proof before Election Day. However, the Trump administration has made repeated false claims that voting machines are vectors of election interference and has threatened to ban many voting machines.
3. Enacting “show your papers” requirements. President Trump can’t impose these unilaterally but he is forcefully pushing Congress to adopt the “SAVE America” Act, which, if passed, would require voters to present documents proving their citizenship when they register to vote. These new requirements would make it extremely difficult to register online or by mail, and could block millions of eligible voters from registering to vote, including women whose married names don’t match their birth certificates and anyone who doesn’t have their birth certificate or a passport. The Brennan Center for Justice estimates that 1 in 10 eligible voters “don’t have proof of citizenship readily available.”  

Importantly, the president cannot impose most of these by himself. Some would require an act of Congress — which is why the administration is pushing the SAVE America Act — and others have already been blocked in court. This list covers what he has said he wants, not what he can lawfully do alone.

For more on the status of the March 2025 and March 2026 elections EOs:

• The President’s 2025 Executive Order on Elections | Brennan Center for Justice
• Status of Trump’s Anti-Voting Executive Order | Brennan Center for Justice
• The President’s 2026 Executive Order on Elections | Brennan Center for Justice  

If the 2026 midterms can’t be canceled, does this mean the authoritarian threat in the United States is over?

Authoritarian regimes like to maintain the illusion of political competition even as they manipulate elections to tilt the playing field in their favor. For the citizens and the international community, this illusion lends an air of legitimacy to their leaders. For the dictators, it allows them to tighten their grip on power by claiming that voters have given them a mandate to rule.

We’ve already established that the Trump administration has no authority to postpone or cancel the 2026 midterms. However, it remains likely that Trump will attempt to deceive voters, disrupt elections, and deny results that don’t fall in his favor.   

What are the roles of states and the federal government in elections?

States have the constitutional responsibility to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of federal elections. However, the Constitution gives Congress the power to make or change election laws that apply to states with respect to federal elections, making it the ultimate authority on these elections. Meanwhile, constitutional amendments have also empowered Congress to protect certain voting rights in all elections. The president has no explicit powers with regard to elections. 

The federal role in elections has expanded over the last 60 years to include:

• Setting minimum standards: Through laws like the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), the federal government mandates certain requirements, such as providing mail-in registration forms at DMV offices and establishing provisional ballot systems.
• Protecting rights: The Voting Rights Act (VRA) and various Constitutional Amendments (15th, 19th, 24th, 26th) allow the federal government to intervene if states engage in discriminatory practices related to race, sex, age, or wealth (e.g., poll taxes).
• Funding and assistance to states: The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) oversees certification for election equipment pursuant to voluntary guidelines and serves as a clearinghouse for best practices and distributes federal grants to states to help upgrade voting equipment and improve security. As of July 2026, the president removed all EAC commissioners, leaving the commission without the quorum it needs to take official action such as certifying voting systems — an unprecedented step whose legal validity may be tested in court.
• Election security: In recent years, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) took on a larger role in protecting election “critical infrastructure” from cyber threats and foreign interference. That involvement has been reduced in the current administration, and it remains unclear what its election security role will be in the current election cycle.

The Trump administration is seeking access to state voter data files (via demands to states, lawsuits, and the SAVE America Act). Isn’t that publicly available information? Why shouldn’t they have access?

While certain pieces of voter registration records are publicly accessible, every state makes its own privacy rules about how much data to release about individual voters (and what the cost of that data should be). States are careful because these public records often contain sensitive data which could be abused by bad — or simply careless — actors. 

In an era of widespread digital data collection, many Americans accept that some of their personal data is “already out there,” beyond their ability to control where it goes and who has it. Against this backdrop, it may not be immediately obvious why it is so troubling that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is demanding state voter data, and the SAVE America Act would strong arm states into handing it over. 

Centralizing voter data at the federal level leaves these sensitive records vulnerable to hackers and cybersecurity threats, making our elections less secure and our personal information less private. Furthermore, the likely intent behind the DOJ’s pressure campaigns, litigation, and other tactics to obtain voter data comes into sharp relief in the context of a DOJ stacked with election deniers. Trump loyalists within the DOJ have repeated the president’s baseless claims of voter fraud, setting the stage to overturn election results he dislikes and could well abuse or intentionally misconstrue voter data in service of those ends.

Are mail-in and overseas ballots secure? 

Yes.

In all 50 states and Puerto Rico, mail-in and overseas ballots are subject to a series of security measures and undergo a rigorous verification process. Every state has its own method for verifying mail ballots, but the most common one is to require signature verification, where election officials carefully compare the signature on a voter’s mail-in ballot to the voter’s signature on other documents in their file. For military and overseas voters, there are procedures and rules pursuant to federal statute.

How is voter fraud properly addressed?

If voter fraud is suspected, there is a process to investigate claims and get to the bottom of it. In most cases, claims would be referred to state law enforcement, and the Attorney General and/or local district attorneys would investigate. Since states have the authority to run elections, they are responsible for passing laws that spell out how to address voter fraud and enforce election crimes. The federal government does have a limited, legitimate role — the Department of Justice can enforce certain federal election laws, and federal prosecutors can bring charges in specific cases. What it cannot do is use that authority as a pretext to intimidate officials, seize election materials, or manufacture doubt about results.

While a proven case of voter fraud would be a serious matter, when it has occurred, it has been on a statistically insignificant level. For example, between 2005 and 2022, the state of Texas detected fraud in only 0.000096% of all ballots cast in those 17 years. In other words, they confirmed 103 cases of voter fraud in over 107 million ballots. And, importantly, though voter fraud is incredibly rare, it is almost always caught, because the safeguards in place to detect it work. 

Is there a role for the U.S. military in policing elections?

No.

Since the 1870s, federal law has expressly prohibited federal troops from engaging in any form of civilian law enforcement. Even if extraordinary circumstances triggered one of the narrow exceptions, such as the need to repel an actual “insurrection,” other parts of the federal code impose specific restrictions on the conduct of federal troops during our elections:

• 18 U.S.C § 592 bans armed federal forces from “any place where a general or special election is held, unless such force be necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States.” 
• 18 U.S.C § 593 prohibits all federal forces from threatening, intimidating, or coercing voters and interfering with election officers’ ability to do their jobs.  

All of these limits apply equally to National Guard units when they are in federalized status. When National Guard units are under state control, the specific limitations on federal troops do not apply, but federal law still makes it a crime for anyone — federal troops, state National Guard personnel, or others — “to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote.” State laws also impose additional limitations during elections and around polling places that would apply to National Guard personnel under state control. A very limited exception has been some state National Guard support for election cybersecurity or helping, out of uniform, as poll workers.

What about federal law enforcement officers?

Many of the same restrictions that protect against the improper deployment of federal troops likewise apply to federal law enforcement. Armed federal agents are barred by federal law from entering polling places. It is a federal crime for federal law enforcement officers to engage in activities that intimidate, threaten, or coerce voters. Some states may also have additional restrictions that prevent law enforcement, whether federal, state, or local, from engaging in certain activities in the election context.

There can be legitimate reasons for law enforcement to be involved in protecting voting rights — investigating genuine threats, safeguarding constitutional protections, responding to a specific security concern. But conduct that disrupts voting or vote counting, intimidates voters or officials, or undermines the exercise of the right to vote is impermissible, whatever justification is offered for it.

Is the 2026 election already stolen?

No!

Between the Trump administration’s inflammatory rhetoric on the right and new anxieties about election interference on the left, it can be difficult for voters to know what to think about the security of the 2026 midterms.

The honest answer: The machinery of the 2026 election — who runs it, how ballots are cast and counted — has not been fundamentally changed. The president has no lawful authority over how states run elections, and the courts have repeatedly said so. That does not mean nothing has happened. Rulings like Louisiana v. Callais have weakened long-standing voting-rights protections, and the administration has spent the year testing the system’s limits. But the structures that make a free and fair election possible remain in place, and the people who run our elections are still doing their jobs.

What should I worry about?

For the first time in modern American history, the greatest threat to our elections is coming from inside the White House. President Trump is dusting off his old playbook — now supercharged with the power of the federal government — of attempting to deceive voters, disrupt processes, and deny results that don’t fall in his favor. 

The top threats to be aware of are:

1. Deception via conspiracies and lies from inside the White House; 
2. Deployment of federal power against political opponents, organizations, and officials;
3. Intimidation at or near polling places — including the threatened presence of ICE or other armed federal agents, which civil-rights groups warn could deter eligible voters;
4. Manipulation of election rules to block eligible voters; and
5. Seeking to overturn the results if favored candidates lose.

That list is real, and we don’t want to minimize it. But here is the thing every one of these tactics has in common: None of them works unless people go along with it. Each depends on officials, courts, or the public accepting a premise that isn’t true — and so far, they haven’t. 

It may seem cliche, but citizens have more power than you may realize, not just because of what your vote says. If the administration is spending so much time and effort trying to dilute your vote, it is for a reason. Every step you take to cast a vote that cannot be prevented, challenged, or rejected, is a triumph against a more authoritarian form of government.

Here’s what you can do:

• Stay informed about election-related legislation in Congress and in your state legislature, plus any policy changes from your state’s chief elections officer, so you are prepared to cope with any changes. 
• Check your voter registration status early to make sure your registration is still active and you know where you can vote. 
• Make a plan to vote in a way that follows instructions to a tee in your state, and, therefore, is least likely to be challenged. If you plan to vote in person on Election Day or during early voting, make sure you know where to go and give yourself plenty of time. If voting by mail, return your ballot as early as practical, either to a dropbox or a mailbox (and mail it in at least 6-7 days before Election Day to make sure it arrives on time). Pay special attention to the rules to complete and validate your mail ballot and its envelope.
• Collect your documents and keep them readily available if need be. Check the voter id rules in your state, and know how to access your proof of citizen documentation just in case. Hopefully you won’t need any of these things, but it’s better to be prepared if your vote or your eligibility is challenged. 
• Talk to your friends, family, and neighbors and have them check their registration status and plan to vote. Share accurate information about voting rules and safeguards.
• Don’t panic. Authoritarianism is about control — sometimes of our physical surroundings, but just as often of our attention and our emotions. Keep your attention on what matters to you and what is in your control.