Trump officials have repeatedly floated deploying federal officers at voting sites
A coalition of nine civil rights organizations and national unions filed a federal lawsuit in Washington, D.C., on Friday seeking to bar federal officers from appearing at polling places during the November elections. The suit, brought by the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund on behalf of the coalition, argues that the administration’s suggestions that federal agents could be deployed to the polls violate the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which bars intimidating another person from voting. NPR was first to report on the Friday lawsuit.
The Friday filing is the second federal suit lodged in the past week to challenge federal law enforcement at the polls. Last week, Denver Clerk and Recorder Paul López and a coalition of voting officials filed a separate action arguing that sending armed federal officers to polling places would violate a federal law that goes back to the Civil War era. That earlier suit is being litigated by Democracy Forward, whose legal director Brian Netter called the Trump administration’s public statements “a striking and disturbing departure from settled U.S. law.”
Both lawsuits arrive against a backdrop of statements from senior administration officials about the possibility of federal officers at voting locations. President Trump said in May that he would do “anything necessary” to ensure “honest” elections. Earlier this month, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents could serve warrants at polling places. Tom Homan, the administration’s border czar, told Fox News last week that agents would not be “sweeping polling places,” though earlier in the year he questioned why anyone would be concerned by such activity. At a contentious congressional hearing Tuesday, FBI Director Kash Patel declined to rule out the possibility of FBI agents at the polls, saying agents would “follow the law.”
In a statement to NPR, DHS said ICE “is not planning operations targeting polling locations.” The same statement added that “ICE conducts intelligence-driven targeted enforcement, and if an active public safety threat endangered a polling location, they may be arrested as a result of that targeted enforcement action.” The White House did not respond to an immediate request for comment about the Friday lawsuit.
The Friday complaint alleges that immigration officers are “reportedly using flawed methodologies and faulty data that will almost certainly result in the surveillance, investigation, and even unlawful detention of U.S. citizens, particularly those from communities of color.” It describes what it calls a “climate in which voters, especially voters of color, are intimidated and fearful of engaging in the democratic process,” and details surges of immigration enforcement around the country that “targeted and terrorized communities with large Black, Latino and Asian populations.”
The complaint tracks closely with allegations raised in a whistleblower report made public earlier this week. The whistleblower alleged that DHS’s “Unlawful Voter Initiative” is moving at “breakneck speed” and relying on unreliable data, leading to U.S. citizens being mistakenly flagged. In a statement about the report, DHS said its “investigative efforts are conducted diligently and professionally.” In recent weeks, federal authorities have charged a number of individuals with alleged illegal voting, though prior audits and investigations have found noncitizen voting to be extremely rare.
The new litigation has emerged as voting officials and civil rights groups report a measurable shift in voter attitudes. A survey released this week by the University of California San Diego found that roughly 40 percent of voters now think it is likely that ICE agents will be present at voting locations in their area. The same survey found that voters of color were significantly more likely than white voters to say they feared voting could put them at risk of being questioned by immigration authorities — concerns that election officials worry could depress turnout even if no enforcement actions materialize.
During primary elections earlier this year, there were multiple reports in various states of federal law enforcement activity inside or near polling sites.
Denver’s López said in an interview that voters are now raising the question of federal agents at the polls in nearly every meeting he holds. “Every single meeting I have, there’s somebody that asks the question, ‘What can we do if federal agents are at the polls?’” López said. He added that he hopes any federal officer who appears at a polling place will be arrested. “We have a plan put together just in case if that happens and it’s not going to be a good day for any ICE agent or any other federal agent or anybody trying to intimidate anybody at the polls,” López said. “They’re going to face prison sentences.”
Bethany Li, executive director of the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said the Friday suit seeks to vindicate the original purpose of the Voting Rights Act. “I think what we’re seeing is a replay of all the fears and harms that Black communities experienced during the civil rights era that led to the Voting Rights Act in the first place,” Li said. “The whole idea was to prevent voter intimidation in similar form in the future. And that’s exactly what we’re seeing now from the federal government.”
The Friday suit names nine plaintiff organizations: Mi Familia en Acción, OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates, the NAACP, and four national unions, among others. The plaintiffs argue that federal agents at polls would chill lawful voting and deter participation by the communities they serve. Héctor Sánchez Barba, president and CEO of Mi Familia en Acción, urged voters in a statement not to be deterred. “Know your rights, make a plan to vote, and make your voice heard,” Sánchez Barba said.