Nana Wu
Late March brought an urgent directive to Joe Teirab, the second-in-command at Minnesota’s U.S. attorney’s office. An email from Washington signaled a federal government-wide scramble to uncover criminal cases that could substantiate President Donald Trump’s persistent claims of widespread noncitizen voting skewing election outcomes. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), a formidable federal law enforcement agency typically focused on cross-border criminal enterprises, had been deployed across the nation, including hundreds of agents tasked with investigating leads in Minnesota.
This directive arrived amidst existing pressure. Nick Davis, a high-ranking Justice Department appointee spearheading the administration’s election fraud crusade, had previously emphasized the paramount priority of these cases. He had reminded Teirab that no case could be declined without explicit approval from higher echelons. By March 24, Davis demanded a status report within hours.
Teirab, a former Marine and Harvard Law graduate who had previously run unsuccessfully for Congress as a Republican, responded with a stark assessment. His email, later reviewed by ProPublica, revealed that after subpoenaing records on approximately 130 individuals, only one had been referred for prosecution. His staff reported that HSI agents, tasked with these investigations, exhibited a "complete lack of understanding" of the process, inundating local election offices with calls and demands for voting histories. Teirab characterized the HSI task force as "disjointed and disorganized," deeming the entire operation "dysfunctional."
Since President Trump’s return to the White House, his administration has initiated a series of unprecedented efforts to identify and prosecute noncitizen voting, a phenomenon he has long alleged without presenting evidence to be rampant. This push intensified in recent weeks, with Trump stating in a nationally televised speech that the American election system was "so vulnerable that no one can possibly defend it." In support of this assertion, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), HSI’s parent agency, released documents claiming the identification of over 250,000 noncitizens on voter rolls across just four states, all governed by Democrats. Crucially, these documents offered no methodology for how this number was calculated.
It is well-documented that the Trump administration tasked HSI—an agency established to combat drug cartels, terrorism, and other transnational criminal enterprises—with leading the charge to uncover election fraud cases within the United States. However, a ProPublica investigation has now revealed for the first time the mechanisms by which the administration harnessed HSI’s personnel, technology, and extensive legal authority for its election agenda, alongside the remarkably meager results produced despite substantial resource investment.
Interviews and internal emails reviewed by ProPublica indicate that career staffers within the Justice Department expressed concerns that transferring voter rolls to HSI for noncitizen voter searches could contravene federal privacy laws. Similarly, seasoned HSI insiders cautioned that employing the agency’s databases and tools on these lists would likely generate numerous mismatches and significantly inflated results. Nevertheless, the administration proceeded.
HSI’s involvement in the hunt for election fraud can be traced back at least to the summer of 2025. Agency supervisors embraced a proposal from a mid-level agent who had publicly echoed President Trump’s election fraud claims. The agent argued that HSI’s powerful databases and investigative tools could identify noncitizens even on publicly available state voter lists, from which most sensitive information had been redacted. Under the Trump administration, the Justice Department had already amassed many public voter rolls as part of a controversial effort to compel states to surrender unredacted versions.
These searches were initiated, and ProPublica’s reporting indicates they helped generate tens of thousands of leads concerning alleged illegal voting nationwide. However, when HSI agents were dispatched to investigate these leads, the outcomes mirrored Teirab’s report from Minnesota. Between January 2025 and May 2026, an analysis of Justice Department data by ProPublica revealed that fewer than 150 alleged noncitizen voters were referred for prosecution. Even fewer, specifically 41 individuals, were ultimately charged with illegal voting or other election-related offenses. This stands in stark contrast to the over 150 million people who voted in the most recent presidential election.
In response to ProPublica’s inquiries, administration officials maintained that the HSI-led initiative was yielding significant results. Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, stated, "President Trump is committed to ensuring that Americans have full confidence in the administration of elections, and that includes totally accurate and up-to-date voter rolls free of errors and unlawfully registered non-citizen voters. Noncitizens voting is a crime. Anyone breaking the law will be held accountable."
A DHS spokesperson declined to answer specific questions regarding the low number of prosecutions resulting from HSI’s work. While the agency did not detail the specific tools or techniques employed, it confirmed that "publicly available data" from state voter rolls had been cross-referenced with information on "known illegal aliens" within its systems. The spokesperson described this initiative as "not rocket science" and "an easy step to secure our elections."
Teirab and the U.S. attorney’s office in Minnesota declined to comment on the matter.
The Rarity of Noncitizen Voting and Administration Tactics
The Trump administration’s campaign to substantiate claims of widespread voter fraud has encountered numerous obstacles. Primarily, as countless studies and state audits have consistently found, purposeful noncitizen voting is exceedingly rare. Noncitizens often appear on voter rolls due to accidental registration or errors made by government officials. For instance, New Jersey disclosed in the preceding month that a mistake within its Motor Vehicle Commission had led to the registration of 6,600 noncitizens, with fewer than 400 actually casting ballots.
Critics of the administration contend that this intensified hunt for noncitizen voters aligns with President Trump’s broader efforts to assert greater federal control over elections and to sow doubt and fear regarding the voting process. Since taking office, Trump has sought to implement new restrictions on voter registration, mail-in ballots, and voting machines, although most of these attempts have been thwarted by judicial challenges.
Former officials from both DHS and the Justice Department have characterized the decision to involve HSI as an escalation, questioning the appropriateness of directing the agency’s resources and technology toward individual instances of alleged illegal voting. Steve Bunnell, a former DHS general counsel and senior intelligence advisor who handled voting fraud prosecutions for over a decade, remarked, "It’s one thing if you’re going after Pablo Escobar. It’s another thing if you’re going after some cleaning lady who’s been working in the United States for 20 years and taking care of her 80-year-old mother and taking her little kids to church."
HSI: The "Swiss Army Knife of Federal Law Enforcement"
President Trump’s decision to enlist HSI in his election integrity efforts was not accidental. Established in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, HSI comprises approximately 7,100 armed, highly trained agents and an additional 800 criminal analysts, with access to extensive confidential data on hundreds of millions of Americans. Although a component of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), HSI has historically maintained a distance from immigration enforcement cases. During the first Trump administration, leaders of 19 HSI regional offices—virtually its entire senior field leadership—signed a letter advocating for HSI to become an independent agency, arguing that ICE’s deportation work discouraged cooperation with its investigations. However, upon President Trump’s return to the White House, it became evident that HSI would play a central role in investigations related to the president’s key priorities: illegal immigration and noncitizen voting.
President Trump identified his lead for repurposing HSI even before his inauguration. In December 2024, he appointed Anthony Salisbury, a 50-year-old career agent who had led HSI’s Miami office, as a deputy homeland security advisor, reporting to White House policy chief Stephen Miller. Salisbury also held a dual appointment as the head of HSI. Salisbury was known for his colorful personality, including his involvement in mixed martial arts and once appearing at agency headquarters with a bruised face and blackened eye from a recent bout. He was also known to entertain colleagues by revealing a bridge covering his missing front teeth.
However, to agency veterans, Salisbury remained linked to a 2011 operation he oversaw in Mexico, which resulted in the death of one agent and the wounding of another in a cartel ambush. An agency review submitted to President Trump in April 2020 concluded that HSI supervisory errors, including those attributed to Salisbury, contributed to the outcome and recommended disciplinary action. No disciplinary action was taken against Salisbury. A White House official described Salisbury as "a critical member of the Trump administration" who was "cleared" in all reviews of the Mexico incident and subsequently "promoted six times under multiple administrations."
Salisbury did not respond to requests for comment from ProPublica.
Upon assuming his new roles, Salisbury took charge of implementing the second Trump administration’s agenda for HSI, issuing staffing directives, reassignments, and promotions, according to current and former agency officials who spoke anonymously for fear of reprisal. Starting in early 2025, Salisbury oversaw the unprecedented reassignment of over 6,000 agents to immigration enforcement, diverting the majority of the agency from its traditional duties. He then turned HSI’s focus toward noncitizen voting, presiding over multiple meetings with officials from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and DHS concerning election fraud, as evidenced by emails and accounts from supervisors who worked with him.
Eric Balliet, a senior HSI manager who retired in 2024 after 23 years with the agency, stated, "Stephen Miller has an HSI deputy for a reason. Salisbury is going to salute and execute, and he is going to make sure that from the HSI side, they fall in line, and there’s going to be no resistance or pushback. HSI has been turned into the Swiss Army knife of federal law enforcement."
The Genesis of the "HSI Tool" and Privacy Concerns
In early July 2025, Frank Quiñones, an HSI special agent who had previously worked under Salisbury in Florida, approached leaders at the HSI Innovation Lab with a concept for leveraging the agency’s technology to identify noncitizen voters on state voter rolls. Sources within the agency indicated that Quiñones had been transferred to Washington to oversee a unit that had previously handled cases of government benefit theft but was then tasked with voting investigations.
The HSI Innovation Lab, situated in an unmarked office in a Washington D.C. suburb, possessed access to the government’s most sensitive databases, including suspicious activity reports and arrest records. Staffed by HSI experts and external consultants, the lab developed software tools to sift through data for information pertinent to criminal investigations. Quiñones was a fervent proponent of President Trump’s election fraud claims, as evidenced by multiple Facebook posts and reposts in which he promoted the assertion that the 2020 presidential election had been stolen. According to sources who worked in the lab, Quiñones proposed using the lab’s technology to identify illegal voters during a meeting with the Innovation Lab’s overseers, despite the agency lacking voter rolls with identifiers such as partial Social Security numbers. Quiñones did not respond to ProPublica’s requests for comment.
As a proof of concept, Quiñones suggested running a publicly available voter list from New Jersey, obtained in February 2021, through HSI’s databases. Lab staff considered his idea "a little insane," deeming it both unreliable and improper. Since public voter rolls do not include unique identifiers for voters, individuals within the lab recognized that linking them to HSI data would inevitably produce an "ungodly" number of false positives, as one staffer described it. The lab team also harbored concerns about violating long-standing safeguards limiting the use of private citizen data. "They didn’t want to touch this," the staffer added. Quiñones, however, defended his proposal, repeatedly asserting, "The president wants this!"
Tom Hodge, an HSI data analyst present at the meeting, suggested utilizing the Athena Toolbox, an analytical platform developed by Sandia National Laboratories that offered access to all of HSI’s databases. Hodge did not respond to ProPublica’s requests for comment. Sandia referred ProPublica’s questions to the relevant parent agencies, including the Department of Energy, which did not respond to our inquiries.
Hodge and the Sandia team dedicated the following six weeks to the project. Their findings indicated the presence of a significant number of noncitizens on Quiñones’s 2021 New Jersey voter list. According to one former HSI official, they claimed to have identified "5,000 high-confidence illegal voters" in a single New Jersey county. Officials at the New Jersey secretary of state’s office, responsible for the state’s voter rolls, declined to comment on this assertion. Beth Thompson, head of a group representing New Jersey’s local election officials, described the number as impossibly high, even accounting for a previously disclosed state error.
This apparent breakthrough arrived at a critical juncture. The Trump administration’s other initiatives to identify noncitizens on state voter rolls were encountering various impediments. The administration had hoped to persuade states to verify the citizenship status of their voters using the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system, but many states declined. Furthermore, most states refused the Justice Department’s demands to surrender their unredacted voter rolls, which included partial Social Security numbers, thereby hindering the agency’s plan to run them through SAVE. Courts had also stymied the DOJ’s attempts to sue for these records, citing the Constitution’s vesting of primary election control with the states.
In an August 21 email to several administration officials, Quiñones promoted the solution he had brought to the HSI Innovation Lab: using HSI’s platform to search voter rolls. He noted that the results could serve both criminal and immigration investigations. By the end of the month, individuals in key election-related roles at DHS and the Justice Department were actively promoting what they termed the "HSI Tool" as a preferred alternative to SAVE, according to individuals familiar with the matter. Among them was Heather Honey, a prominent election denier appointed as a senior counselor at DHS, who was instrumental in leading the government’s efforts to identify noncitizens on voter rolls. Honey did not respond to ProPublica’s requests for comment. In an email responding to questions directed at her, DHS stated that Honey’s "expertise in election administration" was "invaluable to the Department’s efforts to protect critical infrastructure."
The White House also endorsed the initiative. In a November email, J. Brian Sikma, special assistant to the president, expressed excitement that the New Jersey trial cross-referencing voter rolls with DHS data appeared to have identified a "very significant number" of "potential non-citizens." Sikma did not respond to a request for comment. Sikma reported that the DOJ had already obtained public voter rolls for numerous other states and provided a list, emphasizing, "It is of paramount importance that these also be reviewed expeditiously."
Running "Roughshod" Over Privacy Protections
As the push to utilize HSI’s technology for searching voter information gained momentum, a new concern emerged. Career attorneys at the Justice Department, including privacy law specialists, raised objections that transferring voter rolls wholesale from the DOJ to DHS might be legally questionable, according to internal emails reviewed by ProPublica and interviews with several former officials.
The voter rolls collected by the DOJ contained sensitive information on millions of Americans. Even the publicly available versions, routinely acquired by political parties and candidates for targeted advertising, included voters’ addresses, birth dates, and party affiliations. For the 16 states that agreed to share their unredacted voter lists, the DOJ also possessed citizens’ partial Social Security numbers or driver’s license information.
Federal laws, particularly the Privacy Act of 1974, stipulate the types of data government agencies can collect, their permissible uses, methods of sharing, and requirements for protection. Agencies must disclose their plans in advance and solicit public comment. An individual’s information cannot be released or shared without their consent, subject to limited exceptions.
From the outset, the Trump administration’s effort to combine data across federal agencies drew criticism from courts and whistleblowers for failing to adhere to restrictions designed to maintain data privacy and security. For instance, in June, a judge prohibited the government from using SAVE for mass searches, ruling that the administration had violated federal privacy laws by granting DHS access to Social Security data to enhance the tool. The administration has appealed this ruling.
In July 2025, as news spread about the DOJ potentially transferring voter data to DHS, a group of career attorneys reassigned to the voting section voiced their unease to supervisors, according to two former DOJ lawyers. Their concerns were reportedly disregarded, leading to the resignation of most of them. Instead, the DOJ’s office of legal counsel proceeded with plans to share the public voter rolls, asserting that a Privacy Act exception permitted HSI to receive such data without public notice, provided it was for law enforcement purposes. An attorney in the legal counsel’s office explained, according to internal emails, that DHS simply needed to submit a letter officially requesting the data for these purposes.
However, Nikhel Sus, chief counsel for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which has sued the Trump administration on behalf of voter and pro-privacy groups, argued that this exception was intended for obtaining information on individual criminal suspects, not for mass access to data on individuals suspected of no wrongdoing. CREW’s lawsuit was instrumental in limiting SAVE’s use.
Peter Winn, a 29-year veteran of the Justice Department who served as the agency’s acting privacy chief for nearly a decade, drafted a letter outlining the data-sharing agreement between the DOJ and DHS, according to internal documents reviewed by ProPublica. In a February 12 email to two senior DOJ officials, he stated that he had revised an initial draft memo to "make the information sharing arrangement far easier to defend, if and when it is challenged in court." Rather than simply transferring the voter rolls, Winn proposed that DHS request "pertinent and relevant" information about specific individuals from the DOJ, followed by coordination between technical staff at Justice and Homeland Security to fulfill these requests.
"Having slept on it," Winn wrote, "I ended up deciding that our initial idea of sending a huge amount of raw unprocessed voter registration data to DHS, involved taking far too much unnecessary legal risk, given that 99% of the data would implicate the privacy and civil liberties of United States Citizens, and would risk adding to the false narrative in the establishment press of DOJ and DHS being unconcerned with the privacy and civil liberties of Americans." Winn attached his proposed letter, intended for signature by Todd Lyons, then the acting director of ICE.
Winn’s suggested restrictions were quickly abandoned. A second draft of the letter, dated March 4, contained revised language indicating that the voter information would be "transferred" to HSI, with the sole exception of redacting voters’ party affiliation, if possible. The final letter, signed by Lyons and sent to the DOJ just two days later, omitted even this limitation. This three-paragraph letter permitted HSI to use the voter rolls for any "appropriate investigation of potential violations of federal election law."
In response to ProPublica’s questions, Winn stated, "I can’t really comment on internal drafts of correspondence." A Justice Department spokesperson defended the government’s actions, asserting that "no one should oppose intergovernmental data sharing and coordination that enable swift investigations and prosecution of illegal alien voting." DHS echoed the DOJ’s stance, characterizing such information sharing as "essential to protecting America’s election process by keeping noncitizens off voter rolls" and "an easy step to secure our elections."
Sus argued that by consolidating voters’ sensitive personal identifiers, along with their party affiliations and voting histories, the administration had "run roughshod" over privacy laws, creating a "1984-style database" potentially usable for surveillance of political participation. CREW filed a lawsuit in April on behalf of the advocacy group Common Cause, contending that the administration’s use of the law enforcement exception to justify mass sharing of voter information is illegal.
Balliet, the former HSI agent, expressed similar concerns, stating that providing voter rolls for processing through DHS systems constituted "a mass data-collection effort by the government against its own citizens in a non-criminal setting." He added that, on a practical level, the data sharing increased the risk of breaches that could expose law-abiding citizens to identity theft. "As a citizen, I want the government to take seriously the protection of my private data," he said. "If it falls into the wrong hands, it’s not the government that suffers. It’s me."
Collapsing Claims and Lingering Concerns
By January 2026, scores of HSI agents were deployed across the country to investigate thousands of leads concerning alleged illegal voting. Approximately 25,000 of these leads involved individuals identified by SAVE as potential noncitizens on state voter rolls. Another 15,000 were assigned to HSI’s cross-border financial crimes unit, with instructions to prioritize them over money laundering and fraud cases, according to a former high-level HSI official. Quiñones’s unit independently pursued additional cases by reviewing whether individuals who had recently become citizens had voted prior to their naturalization and subsequently lied about it during naturalization interviews.
Further leads originated from running public voter rolls through the HSI lab’s databases, though the exact number remains unclear. Agency sources informed ProPublica that the voter rolls of New Jersey and Pennsylvania were searched using the Athena Toolbox. When DHS announced its finding of over 250,000 noncitizens on the registered voter lists of four Democrat-led states, it specified "as many as" 35,152 in New Jersey and 14,576 in Pennsylvania. Both states have formally requested DHS to provide the source of these figures.
However, as federal investigators began to scrutinize these cases, they frequently unraveled. By May, prosecutors had filed charges against fewer than four dozen individuals for crimes related to noncitizen voting, according to ProPublica’s analysis of DOJ data and federal court filings. Convictions or guilty pleas were secured in 14 cases. The largest concentration of cases was brought in the Southern District of Florida, led by Jason Reding Quiñones (no relation to the HSI agent), a staunch Trump ally who has spearheaded investigations into the president’s political opponents. Voters have been sentenced in eight of the office’s cases, with seven others pending.
In the four states where DHS claimed to have identified over a quarter million noncitizens on voter rolls, prosecutors had initiated a total of seven noncitizen voting cases as of May. Collectively, these states account for more than 40 million registered voters. The exceedingly low numbers reflect the realities HSI investigators encountered on the ground as they attempted to convert leads into prosecutable cases, according to a ProPublica review of records obtained by voting-advocacy groups Campaign Legal Center and Democracy Forward.
Emails exchanged between agents and local election officials in Texas and Ohio indicate that much of the federal information on purported noncitizens was inaccurate, a consequence of flawed data matching. When agents demanded voting histories and registration forms, they frequently discovered that individuals were not registered in the counties where HSI believed them to be. While voters must attest to their U.S. citizenship upon registration, agents found some individuals mistakenly placed on voter rolls after disclosing they were not citizens. Many of these individuals had never voted.
Most HSI agents, experienced in pursuing complex international crimes, lacked prior experience in investigating voting fraud. In his email to Nick Davis at the Justice Department, Teirab, the deputy U.S. attorney in Minnesota, detailed the chaos that ensued when the state and at least six counties received subpoenas for voter records. The demands "presented a host of issues," Teirab wrote to Davis, who did not respond to a request for comment. "An unknown number of agents are constantly arriving in Minnesota without any knowledge of the investigation, the issues already discussed and decided, and the processes they need to follow," Teirab complained. "Instead of getting up to speed and learning, they have demanded many calls and subpoenas, most of which demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the investigation." In Stearns County, central Minnesota, HSI agents subpoenaed voting histories for 13 individuals, only to find that six did not reside in the county, according to county officials.
Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon, a Democrat, stated that the effort highlighted federal investigators’ lack of understanding of "the nuance of elections administration." He described the rate of purposeful election crime as "microscopic" and attributed the instances of noncitizen voting to "very human errors that can happen… not some sort of plot or scheme to dirty up the voting rolls, but are just everyday human beings making mistakes, not intending at all to violate any law." As of May, only one illegal voting case had been referred for prosecution in Minnesota, a state with over 3.8 million registered voters.
Even Republican-led states like Ohio, which has shared its unredacted voter rolls with the DOJ and utilized the SAVE system, have struggled to meet the Trump administration’s demands for cases. In October, the Ohio secretary of state referred over 1,000 voters identified as potential noncitizens to the federal government, alleging that 167 had voted at least once since 2018. At least nine HSI agents in Cincinnati and Cleveland commenced investigations, according to emails obtained by Campaign Legal Center and shared with ProPublica. The agents inundated local election officials with requests for voting histories and other records, some dating back decades. "Sorry again for piecemealing these to you," one agent wrote to an official in Butler County, outside Cincinnati, after making five separate requests over two weeks. Mohamed Al-Hamdani, a Democratic member of Montgomery County’s Board of Elections, which received similar inquiries, described them as "witch hunts" that consumed staff time.
In February, Davis sent an email pressing Ohio’s two U.S. attorney offices for an "election integrity" update, asking: "How close are we to complaints/indictments, how many subjects, what issues you’ve run into, how many referrals have been closed and why, how helpful HSI has been." As of May, only two voting cases had been referred for prosecution in Ohio, with no charges filed, according to federal data. The state has nearly 8 million registered voters.
Historically, federal prosecutors rarely pursued charges against noncitizen voters who genuinely did not understand that voting was illegal for them. Without evidence of a coordinated effort or plot, it was not deemed a prudent use of resources to pursue such prosecutions, according to a former DOJ official who oversaw election cases. However, U.S. attorneys’ offices are now adopting a different approach, pursuing prosecutions that could result in prison terms or deportation. In May 2025, federal prosecutors in Florida filed illegal voting charges against two Ukrainian citizens, a mother and daughter, who had registered after becoming permanent U.S. residents and subsequently voted in the 2024 presidential election. They have pleaded not guilty, with the mother stating in an interview with investigators that she believed having a green card permitted her to vote. They and their attorneys did not respond to requests for comment from ProPublica. The prosecutor handling the case for the Southern District of Florida also did not respond to questions. The mother and daughter are scheduled for trial in September.
Far-Reaching Consequences and Erosion of Trust
Experts in both elections and national security warn of profound, long-term costs stemming from the federal government’s deployment of its investigative and prosecutorial might to validate the president’s claims about noncitizen voting. Current and former HSI agents report that critical investigations—including task forces targeting drug rings, human trafficking, and money laundering—have languished as the agency has shifted its focus to noncitizen voting and immigration enforcement.
In February 2026, according to court files and emails reviewed by ProPublica, an HSI agent in Ohio leading a multistate child sex abuse investigation was abruptly reassigned to pursue dozens of leads on suspected noncitizen voters. This work consumed months, and it was not until May that an arrest was made in the child abuse case. Prosecutors have filed child exploitation and pornography charges against the 38-year-old suspect in connection with acts involving at least five 14-year-old girls. "Cases like this don’t just stop," said Balliet, the 23-year HSI veteran. "When you pull people off them for an extended period of time, those criminal networks will adapt, and people get killed and kidnapped."
Federal data suggests a broader slowdown in HSI’s historically most urgent work. According to an annual government report, the number of wiretaps obtained by DHS—often used to investigate drug trafficking—plummeted to 23 in 2025, down from 133 the previous year. DHS attributed this decline to several factors, including "changes in administration enforcement and prosecutorial priorities." "It’s never been a better time to be involved in transnational organized crime," commented John Tobon, a high-ranking HSI official who retired in early 2025.
In its statement, DHS denied that HSI had neglected its core mission, asserting that the agency had increased its efforts to combat criminal cartels, gangs, and drug traffickers in response to multiple Trump executive orders. Despite HSI’s voting-related investigations yielding only a limited number of prosecutions, voter advocacy groups express concern that the Trump administration will use these efforts to justify more extreme interventions. Recent tactics include threats to withhold funds from states perceived as unwilling to check their voter rolls for noncitizens and pronouncements of prosecuting state election officials who "knowingly" fail to remove noncitizens. President Trump has also continued to urge Congress to enact the SAVE America Act, which would mandate proof of citizenship for voter registration, a measure criticized by advocates as a barrier to voting. Democrats are reportedly preparing for the possibility of federal troops being deployed to polling stations to intimidate voters.
"Those concerns are playing out in real time, with far-reaching consequences," said Dax Goldstein, a director at the States United Democracy Center, a nonprofit organization dedicated to bolstering confidence in elections. "When federal agencies are misused and weaponized, people lose trust in government itself."
Joko Widodo
admin
Nila Kartika Wati
Yuyun Lusiyani
Pevita Pearce