The high-profile deployment of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to airports has renewed help on the proper and concern on the left about the chance of ICE going to the polls in November.
Steve Bannon is urging President Donald Trump — who shocked officers in his personal administration this weekend by ordering ICE agents to airports to assist alleviate lengthy traces — to deal with that transfer as a costume rehearsal for the 2026 midterms, arguing the similar armed officers ought to in the end be positioned round polling locations.
“We can use this as a test run — a test case — to really perfect ICE’s involvement in the 2026 midterm election,” Bannon, a longtime Trump ally, mentioned Monday on his “War Room” podcast, reiterating his previous requires a legislation enforcement presence at the polls.
While Bannon holds no official function in the administration, his remarks reignited issues amongst some election officers and Democratic lawmakers who concern the Trump administration might attempt to use ICE as a political weapon — intimidating voters and doubtlessly suppressing turnout in November. They argue that type of presence at polling websites might run afoul of federal legislation.
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, instructed NCS’s Dana Bash on Tuesday that the airport deployment suits what he sees as a broader technique: utilizing the army and federal legislation enforcement to assist Trump maintain energy — together with, doubtlessly, throughout the midterms.
“These are all tools of how the president is trying to think about a much larger plan, which is, if you cannot hold onto power through democratic elections, then adjust democratic elections,” Moore instructed NCS.
Wes Moore thinks ICE deployed to airports is a part of Trump’s larger plan
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore says he thinks the Trump administration’s use of ICE in neighborhoods and airports is a part of one thing larger. NCS’s Dana Bash talks to the Democratic governor about what he thinks President Trump’s long run technique could also be.
Arizona Democratic Secretary of State Adrian Fontes mentioned he’s dismissing Bannon’s feedback till one thing “official” emerges. But he famous Republicans in Arizona’s state legislature not too long ago proposed requiring federal immigration agents at each polling place, drop field and early voting web site in 2026 — an concept that by no means superior.
“It’s perfectly well acknowledged that ICE is not permitted in our polling places,” Fontes instructed NCS. “If there is overreach, we’re going to meet it with every lever of power that we have.”
Federal law bars deploying federal “troops or armed men” to polling locations, besides to repel “armed enemies of the United States.” Elections are run by states, regardless of Trump’s calls to “nationalize” voting in sure locations.
“Sending ICE or any federal agents to interfere in elections or intimidate voters would be unlawful, and I am confident that courts would step in,” mentioned Wendy Weiser, vp for democracy at the left-leaning Brennan Center for Justice. “There’s certainly a reason to be worried when these outlandish threats are made. But there’s also a lot of reason to be calm.”
Even as Bannon and different Trump allies escalate the rhetoric, some administration officers have dismissed the thought as a Democratic fever dream.
In a name with state election officers final month, Heather Honey — a longtime election skeptic who’s now a senior election integrity official at the Department of Homeland Security — mentioned the administration wouldn’t ship ICE agents to polling locations this yr. A gaggle of Democratic secretaries of state later pressed the administration for that pledge in writing.
But some Trump officers have prevented closing the door fully, suggesting federal agents could possibly be deployed if there have been an alleged risk at voting websites.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt instructed reporters final month that it’s “not something I’ve ever heard the president consider,” including, “I can’t guarantee that an ICE agent won’t be around a polling location in November. I mean, that’s frankly a very silly hypothetical question.”
At his confirmation hearing last week, Sen. Markwayne Mullin — who was sworn in Tuesday to change Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem — didn’t rule out the chance.
“The only reason why my officers would be there is if there was a specific threat for them to be there, not for intimidation,” Mullin instructed lawmakers. “Then we will work with local law enforcement. There will be a reason for us to be there, and it’ll be known why we’re there.”
Noem beforehand supplied comparable noncommittal solutions to lawmakers, saying DHS had “no plans” to station immigration officers at polling areas — whereas additionally echoing a standard Republican line of assault: If noncitizens aren’t supposed to vote, why would Democrats object to immigration enforcement close by?
“Do you plan on illegal aliens voting in our elections, senator?” Noem requested one Democratic lawmaker during a hearing earlier this month. “There should be no need to, unless you plan on illegals voting.”
Research and election audits have persistently discovered noncitizen voting is exceedingly uncommon. Still, some Republican lawmakers have pushed again on the issues about ICE at the polls.
“Why should you ban ICE from being at polling places?” GOP Rep. Jason Smith mentioned final month. “Because illegals aren’t supposed to vote in this America.”
Voting rights advocates say that the risk alone might deter some Americans from voting — particularly in immigrant communities — and level to latest ICE operations in locations like Minneapolis the place federal officers clashed with and detained US residents in addition to undocumented migrants.
A latest NBC News poll discovered 38% of registered voters view ICE positively, whereas 56% view it negatively.
Behind the scenes, state election officers and voting rights teams say they’re drawing up backup plans — prepping courtroom challenges in case of deployments, coordinating with native legislation enforcement, and coaching ballot staff on how to defuse tense conditions.
Several Democrat-led states are transferring to preemptively ban federal immigration agents from polling locations. New Mexico turned the first to enact such a legislation this month, barring armed officers “in the civil, military or naval service of the United States” from polling websites or inside 50 ft of a poll field from the begin of early voting.
“We have to prepare for the worst,” Maine Democratic Secretary of State Shenna Bellows instructed NCS. “Federal law, the Constitution and state law are on our side, and we will fight to protect voters rights and a safe and secure election in 2026.”
Some argue the back-and-forth itself could also be a part of the technique: even when a broad ICE presence at polling locations by no means materializes, the discuss of it may nonetheless do injury by sowing concern and retaining voters at house.
“I think that there is an attempt to use rhetoric around ICE at the polls to stoke fear,” mentioned Danielle Lang, vp for voting rights and rule of legislation at the Campaign Legal Center. “I just want voters to know there’s no reason to believe that there’s going to be law enforcement at the polls. The laws have not changed.”
These threats come amid a broader push by the administration to develop federal affect over elections. Trump allies are longing for the president to declare a nationwide emergency tied to elections and impose strict federal oversight of the 2026 midterms.
The Justice Department, in the meantime, is suing greater than two dozen states searching for their unredacted voter information — a transfer critics describe as federal overreach. Trump officers say voter lists already turned over by some states present lots of of 1000’s of registrations that shouldn’t be on the rolls, however they have not launched the information or different proof to substantiate the declare.