I didn’t notice this already posted: Trump is likely to declare emergency and take over elections. Putting this in Politics & Elections, but it may belong in the Pit?
Pro-Trump activists who say they are in coordination with the White House are circulating a 17-page draft executive order that claims China interfered in the 2020 election as a basis to declare a national emergency that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly previewed a plan to mandate voter ID and ban mail ballots in November’s midterm elections, and the activists expect their draft will figure into Trump’s promised executive order on the issue. The White House declined to elaborate on Trump’s plans.
“Under the Constitution, it’s the legislatures and states that really control how a state conducts its elections, and the president doesn’t have any power to do that,” said Peter Ticktin, a Florida lawyer who is advocating for the draft executive order. Ticktin attended the New York Military Academy with Trump and was part of his legal team that filed an unsuccessful 2022 lawsuit accusing Democrats of conspiring to damage him with allegations that his 2016 campaign colluded with Russia.
“But here we have a situation where the president is aware that there are foreign interests that are interfering in our election processes,” Ticktin went on. “That causes a national emergency where the president has to be able to deal with it.”
Not only is this going to be a bullshit move by Trump, it will also lead to a boy cried wolf effect the next time China does in fact try to influence an election.
It can’t legally work. The Congress and States control who can vote, how they vote, and how the votes are counted. The President explicitly does not have a role in that. If Trump tries to interfere with the mechanics of voting/counting votes, then the State can file a lawsuit to stop it from happening.
“Under the Constitution, it’s the legislatures and states that really control how a state conducts its elections, and the president doesn’t have any power to do that,” said Peter Ticktin, “But here we have a situation where the president is aware that there are foreign interests that are interfering in our election processes,” Ticktin went on. “That causes a national emergency where the president has to be able to deal with it.”
Nope, nope, nope! The Constitution is pellucidly clear on this:
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
Except for the power to veto laws passed by Congress, no role for the President. And the Constitution does not have any emergency powers clause other than being able to suspend habeas corpus for a rebellion or invasion.
So, Washington Post, such an executive order would not “unlock” diddly-squat because there is no “break only in case of emergency” reserve of constitutional power for the President to access. To correct your subheading sentence, the draft executive order “would usurp extraordinary power over voting.”
I’m not sure why Trump is doing this now, months before the election and right after the Supreme Court handed him a big fat loss on tariffs, when it gives the courts ample time to find this thing unconstitutional. He would have caused a lot more uncertainty and chaos if he waited until September or October.
If you’re able to read the WaPo article, this is somewhat addressed.
A presidential emergency on elections has never been tested in court. As precedent, the activists point to a 2018 executive order that declared an emergency to impose sanctions on foreign entities targeting election infrastructure. Biden repeatedly extended that emergency, and in 2024 the Treasury Department used the order to place Iranian and Russian entities under sanctions.
And you’re assuming that the courts will block his order in time for the elections. Would every state have to file a lawsuit? Would red states file a lawsuit? Hurts my head to think about.
The gift link didn’t work. But honestly, I don’t need to read it. Not really.
Using the part you quoted, an executive order doesn’t move the needle on whether the President can change who and how voting happens. It’s pretty clear. If the Pres thinks there is a national emergency, or there actually is one, and wants to sanction countries for interfering in our elections, then that’s fine. Go for it. But what the President cannot do, is unilaterally change State/Congressional laws about who/how voting happens in response to an emergency.
It could be blocked in days. File lawsuit in a single district court (or many), Court enters a nation-wide TRO “pausing” everything until it gets sorted out. That TRO could be appealed all the way to Supreme Court who could issue a ruling very quick.
There is nothing to indicate the Supreme Court would allow this. Purely to clarify the issue, if I play devil’s advocate to advise Trump on best way to win, then it’s do not change any laws/requirements on who/how voting happens, but just provide “security” to enforce that those laws are carried out due to this national emergency that the States are unprepared to handle on their own. It can seem like ID laws and ban mail ballots is “security” but it’s not. It’s forcing new laws that affect who/how voting happens.
If the States/Congress want to pass new laws quickly, that’s fine. But the Pres cannot unilaterally enforce that stuff onto the States under the guise of a national security threat.
Late: To be clear, I fully expect Trump to try lots of ways to interfere with our election. He is the biggest national security threat.
How does the gift link not work? I can’t repost the whole article, but yes, you should read the whole thing. It’s exclusive to WaPo so I can’t post a different source.
The Status Kuo substack today focuses on how trump can succeed with his election interference. I’ve cut and pasted parts of it, but you should read the whole thing.
But if the polls and special election results are a measure of voter sentiment, Trump acting on his own won’t be enough to stop a blue tsunami. To do that, he will need to enlist the help of other key players in government. Looking more closely at who will be in decision-making roles this November, a highly troubling pattern emerges: In many of the most critical roles, Trump has in place extremist election deniers. These individuals have repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to challenge or reject the election results and do whatever they can to stop the Democrats from retaking power.
Kurt Olson: Director of “Election Security”
In 2024, Olson told Trump it was imperative to preserve voting machine data in the swing states of Arizona, Wisconsin and Georgia in advance of the elections. Trump wasn’t in power then and didn’t have the FBI at his disposal to seize such voting machine data. But we should assume he would have done so if he could, and that he will do so in 2026. Indeed, Trump has said his failure to order the voting machines seized back in 2020 was a mistake.
Heather Honey: Olson’s deputy who previewed the Fulton County raid
Olson’s deputy, Heather Honey, is also a worrisome figure.
Even more troubling, in light of what we just saw in Fulton County, in a separate call with right-wing activists last March, Honey suggested the White House could declare a “national emergency,” then dictate “new rules” to state and local governments, all based on an “actual investigation” of the 2020 election if it showed there had been a “manipulation” of the vote.
“And therefore, we have some additional powers that don’t exist right now,” she said in March, “and therefore, we can take these other steps without Congress and we can mandate that states do things and so on.”
Bondi, Patel and Johnson: the three-headed election denial hydra
The combination of Bondi, Patel and Johnson, working with the election deniers in the “Election Integrity” unit of Homeland Security, is insidiously dangerous. Here’s just one example. Based on conspiratorial claims from Olson and Honey about election machine rigging, Patel’s FBI could seize voting data, just as it did in Fulton County, Georgia. Bondi’s Justice Department could then charge people criminally to lend a veneer of legitimacy to false claims of fraud. The White House could declare a “national emergency” of election fraud and order machines and data seized. And Speaker Johnson could use all of this as a pretense not to seat duly elected representatives.
I wrote this several hours ago and somehow forgot to hit send. I think I hit sufficient different points to make it still work. Sorry if I duplicated what has been said in the interim.
If you read through the article and you see that nothing this Peter Ticklin guy proposed ever worked. Yeah, Trump pardoned Tina Peters. And then everyone laughed because he had no power to do so. Trump’s proof of citizenship EO is stalled in court. The SAVE Act might not make it through the Senate. Trump wrote that “I have searched the depths of Legal Arguments not yet articulated or vetted on this subject," so this will be hit by a million lawsuits if he ever issues it. Only authoritarian dictators get away with illegal proclamations.
Now, if SCOTUS allows birthright citizenship, which is as fixed in the Constitution as the President having no say over elections, then we may be in a legal coup in which any President only Trump can do whatever he wants. His problem then becomes the reality of time. Early voting for the midterms is about eight months away. Overhauling 50 states’ entire election systems is impossible. I’m not sure if the reddest state can turn that around in time.
I’m not sure it it applies here but I’m not sure if they can still do that. This came up in a recent LegalEagle video.
On June 27, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that, “Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts."[13]
In the end, Trump’s ability to manipulate the elections depends on whether he’s allowed to get away with it, not whether his legal rationalizations for doing so are 100% bullshit or only 99%.
User error I think. I may have clicked it and accidentally deleted? Tried to click (again) and I can’t read it anymore / wants me to pay or enter email.
I don’t think a suggestion from Heather Honey is persuasive. This is why I don’t feel like I need to read it. Happy to cite the Constitution and relevant laws.
I have no doubt they will double down from what they tried in 2020 and do it better. It’s all still utter crap, though.
This is different. This is not changing who/how votes happen. It’s after the voting is completed. Not sure where this would ultimately go or for how long, but I think we just saw him do this already.
re: Nationwide Injunctions. They still can, but the use is being scrutinized more and more.
I’m replying to a hypothetical idiotic shitshow I don’t know much about, but getting one/several injunctions won’t be hard when the executive is making new laws (or claiming powers that do not exist based on a bunch of bing bongs legal take). Trump’s lackeys want to do serious things for sure, but they are not serious people. They are bing bongs.
The House is not a continuing body. When it reconvenes in Jamuary, Johnson will not be speaker unless he is elected to that position by a majority of the members-elect.
Agreed. Whether it’s legal or not is academic; what matters is whether he will actually make the attempt, whether enough will cooperate for it to succeed, and whatever consequences result either way. This is the sort of thing where being legal or not legal doesn’t really matter. in terms of whether or not it will succeed.
Think of it like securing your home. Do you worry about what legal loopholes a person might exploit when breaking into your home? I doubt it, because it doesn’t matter. Your concern is going to be with how you can physically secure your property.
In terms of the midterms and '28, he’s/they’re also flooding the zone … again.
I was in commission-only sales years ago. The old saying was, “throw enough shit at the wall and some of it’ll stick,” meaning: get enough people on the phone, appointments scheduled, showings executed, offers written, etc., etc., and some percentage of them will close. You’ll make money.
This has been Trump 101 from Day One – particularly in Trump 2.0: he daily utters an unbelievable and nearly impossible to follow number of bat-shit crazy statements, generally about things he’d like to do.
And he does some of them.
And who can possibly ever know which?
If the election thing invokes a microcosm of that strategy, it represents a serious threat.
We’ve seen Trump try many, many crazy things, and they’re almost always struck down. However, that doesn’t mean it’s fine. As you say, the sheer volume of BS is problematic. And even if they are later declared illegal, that doesn’t erase the harm done in the meantime. Such as his illegal tariffs, and illegal deployment of NG troops.
I’ve said it many times; this nation isn’t set up to handle someone like Trump. For anyone who knows computers, he engages in a sort of DDoS attack with his executive orders, and it has a similar effect at times.