Think you're Gonna Vote? Think Again. And Prepare!

By Jessie Seigel / October 12, 2026

National Guardsmen block an official Board of Elections ballot drop box at the Foggy Bottom Metro station near George Washington University in Washington, DC.

In August, Marc Elias, the foremost attorney fighting to protect voting rights, noted that Donald Trump’s year and a half long efforts to “take control of U.S. elections” had, so far, largely failed. But Elias warned that, “with each loss, Trump has grown more desperate and his actions more brazen, raising the risk that he will try something even more lawless…”

The Trump regime’s lawlessness—its criminal attacks on voting in the 2026 midterm election—have already begun. As one can see in the photo at the top of this article, armed guardsmen are bodily blocking a Board of Elections official ballot drop box in the Foggy Bottom neighborhood of Washington, DC. One of them is positioned directly in front of the slot in which voters would insert their ballots. By doing this, these guardsmen have committed a federal crime. And if they were ordered to do it, they have obeyed an illegal order.

As pointed out by the Brennan Center for Justice, under 18 USC Section 593:

It is illegal to deploy federal troops or armed federal law enforcement to any polling place. …it is a federal crime for anyone in the U.S. military to interfere in elections in any way.

The crime of deploying federal “troops or armed men” to any location where voting is taking place or elections are being held is punishable by up to five years in prison. The only exception is if “such force be necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States.”  

Of course, there’s zero chance that Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ) would prosecute. They’ll probably claim that the official ballot drop box is not a “polling place,” and make lawyers fight them in court.

For those who are unfamiliar with voting in DC, we can vote at a polling place in person in November, but we also can vote early either by mail through the U.S. Post Office (USPS) or by dropping our mail-in ballots in Board of Elections official ballot drop boxes located throughout the District. These boxes have locks on them, and warnings stating: “Any tampering with the ballots or drop box is a crime.” Delivery to the drop box should constitute direct delivery to the Board of Elections and so the box should be considered, in effect, a polling place.  

Furthermore, given Trump’s current efforts to get the USPS to refuse to deliver ballots, the drop boxes provide the most secure manner in which to vote early. Since Foggy Bottom is the Metro stop for George Washington University (GWU), deployment of the guardsmen at the drop box there suggests a strategic goal to obstruct voting by GWU students.

It’s not clear whether anything beyond indignant words about the National Guard's trespass will be forthcoming from the local DC government. The joint Task Force DC euphemistically minimized the National Guard’s deployment as being “near” the official ballot box, rather than blocking it.

And Jeff Bezos’s Washington Post used the headline “Troops Loitering Near Ballot Box Were Not Guarding It”—an attempt to deny what the photo clearly shows. According to the Post, the National Guard is now claiming that the guardsmen had merely paused as part of a patrol but were not specifically guarding the box, that they receive training about not standing by the boxes, and that they will be told to be more aware of where they are standing.

This regime has a proclivity to see what illegal or intimidating actions it can get away with and, when caught, pretend they were innocent errors. So, no claim by an organ of this administration should be given a benefit of the doubt. And certainly, the obstruction of the drop box by three guardsmen should not, by the media, be mischaracterized as loitering "near" the box.

Washington DC is the canary in the coal mine, previewing what Trump has in store for the rest of the country.

In an August issue of Democracy Docket, Jacob Knutson set out five ways in which the Trump regime may be plotting to rig the midterm elections: illegally deploying military or law enforcement to the polls; directing the USPS not to deliver mail-in ballots; seizing ballots and voting equipment; purging voter rolls; and refusing to seat Democrats who win seats in Congress.

Trump has already begun implementing some of these plots.

Illegally deploying troops or law enforcement to the polls

Trump’s Attorney General Todd Blanche and Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin  have endorsed deploying ICE agents to polling places during the midterm election.

A Democracy Forward report sets out some of ICE’s plans for the coming election. Two key findings of the report are that: (1) ICE offices have investigated civic engagement nonprofits; and (2) “ICE officials have confirmed policies to allow armed federal officers to conduct immigration operations at polling sites in November." Never mind that federal laws prohibit that.

Considering what the Trump regime is doing in DC, these statements of ICE intent must not be underestimated.

Directing the USPS not to deliver mail-in ballots

In March, Trump issued an executive order directing the USPS to deliver ballots only to voters on his federal government’s pre-approved lists. Postmaster General David Steiner agreed to comply with this order.

Although a federal judge in Massachusetts blocked USPS from following Trump's directive, the Trump regime continues to attempt to install that voting restriction before the November election. In a stalling action, DOJ and a dozen Republican-led states have asked the Supreme Court to lift the Massachusetts Judge’s block.

But even if some of Trump's Supreme Court justices fall out of line and back the lower court, Knutson writes that the block would only apply to the particular parties that had filed the challenge—23 blue states and DC. USPS could still refuse to deliver ballots in states that were not party to the suit. This would include states like California, Colorado, Utah, Oregon, and Washington, in which, according to Knutson, voting by mail is the most common way to vote.

Seizure of ballots and/or voting equipment

Trump has already conducted a trial run of this gambit. His FBI took control of about 700 boxes of 2020 election records—including original ballots—at an election facility in Fulton County, Georgia. Trump directed his then Director of National Intelligence, who had no legal role or authority related to elections, to participate.

If Trump uses federal agents or the military to take control of ballots or voting systems in the 2026 midterms, he could fake proof of voting fraud where there isn't any.

Purging Voter rolls

Trump’s DOJ has demanded registration records from all states that maintain voter rolls and has sued those who would not comply.

Twenty-one federal judges have rejected DOJ’s lawsuits. Nevertheless, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Mullin has threatened election officials with criminal charges and prison if they don’t comply with other unreasonable or illegal demands related to their voter rolls.

Refusing to Seat Democrats

The final danger will come to fruition between the election and the time when those who won are due to take their seats in Congress. We can expect drawn out challenges to Democratic wins, and a lot of projection onto Democrats of the Republican party’s own efforts to cheat.

In addition, according to Democracy Docket: “under federal law and Supreme Court precedent, the final say on who gets seated in the House is entirely controlled by a majority of its members — meaning, in this case, the lame-duck Republican majority.”  That is, a lame-duck Republican majority led by the craven speaker, Mike Johnson who does anything Trump asks him to do.

State Plans to Counter Trump's Assault on Democratic Elections

At the beginning of 2026, state election officials began meeting to plan how to counter Trump’s coming attacks on voting. According to Democracy Docket interviews with six of the Democratic Secretaries of State, they have been coordinating with each other on scenarios that include armed federal agents at polling places, disruption of mail-in voting; interfering with voting machines and blocking of election certification.

Understandably, the states are not publicizing their strategies in detail. But they have noted that it will be in part a litigation response, a communications response, and an administrative response.

They have stated that they are coordinating with their state attorneys general on the legal response to the possible confiscation of ballots and voting machines, delay of mail ballot delivery, or blocking of election certification.

The fact that states have been taking the Trump regime's threats seriously is a promising development that gives one some hope. But it does not address the effect in Republican-controlled states. Nor does it address the need to make preparations to counter armed personnel at polling places or the confiscation of ballots or voting machines by force. Legal action taken only afterwards will amount to closing the barn door after the horse has fled.

It may be that states fear giving Trump an excuse to declare martial law. But if the federal government tramples the Constitution, illegally seizes power, and does so by force, coordinated opposition by state and local law enforcement may be necessary to defend and save the rule of law.