Democrats sue Trump admin to keep armed agents from polls during midterms

Democrats filed a lawsuit* late Wednesday asking a federal court to prevent the Trump administration from deploying armed federal agents to voting sites during the midterm elections.

The Democrats warn in the lawsuit that the administration “stand[s] willing and able to send agents into polling places,” and argue that doing so would constitute illegal voter intimidation.

The lawsuit was filed by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), and the Democratic Governors Association (DGA), as well as Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

In public comments and sworn testimony, Trump administration officials have repeatedly suggested federal agents could be sent to polling places this fall, an idea President Donald Trump himself has floated multiple times. Attorney General Todd Blanche has likewise repeatedly endorsed election site deployments. 

Earlier this month, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said ICE agents could make arrests at polling places. And on Tuesday, FBI Director Kash Patel told a Senate panel, under oath, that the suggestion he would not send agents to the polls was “just another lie.”

The Democrats argue those comments, plus many others in recent weeks, demonstrate that the defendants — the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the FBI and their leaders — have clear plans to use law enforcement to influence the election outcome.

The lawsuit seeks a judicial order barring defendants from ordering armed officers anywhere “in the vicinity of open polling places, including dropboxes, curbside voting locations,” or any other place where votes are collected, counted or certified — starting when early voting begins and lasting through the post-election ballot-curing process. 

The plaintiffs point to multiple federal laws barring law enforcement from interfering with elections. One statute prohibits military commanders and anyone else “in the civil… service of the United States” from sending armed troops or agents to polling places. And Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act broadly forbids voter intimidation. 

“[D]ispatching armed federal agents to the polls — or even threatening to do so — is forbidden by federal law,” the Democrats argue (itals in original). “This is because voters need not actually be arrested, questioned, or even approached in order for such threats to intimidate them from exercising the franchise.”

The Democratic groups also allege that this nascent plan violates the Administrative Procedure Act because it conflicts with federal law. 

After Trump returned to the White House, DHS adopted aggressive immigration enforcement tactics, including a two-month-long deployment to Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota. Immigration agents’ violent tactics have led to the deaths of immigrants, bystanders and protesters. Members of Congress attempting to conduct oversight of DHS have also been assaulted by federal agents.

That recent history suggests that the Trump administration’s potential plan to deploy federal agents near voting sites could cause vulnerable voters — particularly naturalized citizens — to avoid the ballot box out of fear.

“[B]ecause no voter can know in advance whether agents will be waiting at his or her polling place, the Polling Place Policy chills voting everywhere, not only where ICE and FBI agents actually appear,” the plaintiffs argue. 

A lawsuit filed Friday by civil rights organizations and labor unions led by the NAACP argues that the administration’s that its actions — including its aggressive immigration raids, which have swept up U.S. citizens — have already created an atmosphere of unlawful intimidation around voting.

“Because of the Administration’s intimidating actions and rhetoric, across the country, Plaintiffs’ members and other voters credibly fear that their participation in this November’s midterm elections will subject them to physical force and increased surveillance by the federal government,” the civil rights organizations wrote.

*The Elias Law Group (ELG) represents the Democrats in this case. ELG Firm Chair Marc Elias is the founder of Democracy Docket.