Related Articles
-Editorial
As the 2026 midterm elections approach, a series of actions by the Justice Department and proposals in Congress have intensified legal battles and renewed concerns about federal overreach into election administration, a responsibility the Constitution largely assigns to states and local governments.
The Justice Department has demanded that nearly every state and Washington, D.C., turn over election-related records, including statewide voter registration lists and, in some cases, ballots from prior elections or access to voting equipment. The federal government has sued more than 20 states and the District of Columbia for declining to comply, prompting disputes over privacy, election security, and the limits of federal authority.
The records sought contain highly sensitive personal information, raising alarms among election officials and civil rights advocates. At the same time, Congress is considering legislation that would tighten voter identification requirements, mandate voter roll purges and restrict voting by mail. Voting rights experts warn that the combined effect of litigation, legislation, and political rhetoric could affect voter access and increase uncertainty over election outcomes.
Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School professor and former White House senior adviser for democracy and voting rights, said state and local officials, not the president, retain primary control over how elections are conducted.
“He doesn’t have his hand on the switch that makes things happen with respect to elections,” Levitt said during a briefing with journalists. “In the elections context, he’s not in charge.”
Levitt said many of the most visible disruptions to the election landscape stem from actions by the executive branch, including efforts by President Donald Trump to assert authority over areas where he lacks legal control.
“The most prominent disruptions right now are coming from the federal government,” Levitt said, describing them as attempts “to project power that he does not have.”
While presidents exercise broad authority in areas such as immigration, national defense, and trade, Levitt said elections operate differently. Federal law sets broad rules, but administration is carried out by state and local officials. As a result, he said, many states have declined to comply with federal demands they believe lack a legal basis.
“The states aren’t compliant because they don’t have to be,” Levitt said.
Courts have repeatedly blocked executive actions seeking to influence election administration, Levitt said, including efforts to collect voter files nationwide and an executive order that attempted to direct state election procedures. He said comments about nationalizing or canceling elections have had no practical effect.
“Officials who actually run elections are treating those statements as noise,” Levitt said.
Danielle Lang, vice president for voting rights and rule of law at the Campaign Legal Center, said courts have consistently reaffirmed constitutional limits on presidential authority over elections.
“That is simply not the story when it comes to elections in particular,” Lang said, referring to judicial responses to recent executive actions.
Lang said voting rights groups have coordinated legal challenges to federal efforts, including lawsuits that blocked directives ordering the U.S. Election Assistance Commission to alter the federal voter registration form created under the 1993 National Voter Registration Act.
“There are two sets of actors in our constitutional order that have those powers,” Lang said. “It is the states in the first instance, and it is Congress, if it so chooses to act.”
Lang also cited court rulings rejecting Justice Department lawsuits seeking broad access to voter rolls, saying judges have found no legal basis for sweeping data requests.
“Uniformly, so far, the courts that have ruled on this have ruled that the Department of Justice has no base for hoovering up this amount of data,” she said.
At the same time, advocacy organizations say election changes disproportionately affect communities of color.
Asian Americans are the fastest-growing racial group in the United States and an increasingly influential voting bloc, but they continue to face barriers to full participation, said John C. Yang, president and executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC.
“The fundamental premise of America is that voting is a right,” Yang said. “It’s not a privilege.”
Asian Americans accounted for about 24 million people in the United States as of 2020, and voter participation has risen sharply in recent elections, Yang said. However, language access remains a major obstacle, with about 30% of Asian Americans having limited English proficiency.
“Even for native English speakers, ballots can be complicated,” Yang said.
Latino voters face similar challenges, said Andrea Senteno, Washington regional counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Latinos make up about 19% of the U.S. population and account for more than half of the nation’s population growth over the past decade.
Despite that growth, Senteno said voter registration and turnout rates among Latinos continue to lag.
“There are still very significant gaps,” she said, citing unlawful voter purges, restrictions on language assistance, and proposed proof-of-citizenship requirements as barriers.
Senteno said legislation such as the SAVE Act and related proposals could create fear and confusion that deters eligible voters.
“These bills make it much harder for people to register and vote,” she said.
MALDEF has challenged state laws restricting voter assistance in Arkansas and Texas, arguing they violate the Voting Rights Act. Federal appeals courts upheld those laws, and the organization recently asked the Supreme Court to review the cases.
As legal challenges continue, Levitt said high voter engagement could outweigh efforts to restrict access, even in states pursuing aggressive redistricting ahead of the midterms.
“Redistricting works as a sort of seawall,” he said. “But in the event of a voter tsunami, that water comes right over the top.”
Despite heightened rhetoric and litigation, voting rights attorneys and election officials say they expect the mechanics of voting in 2026 to resemble recent elections.
