ICE's Potential Role in the 2026 US Midterm Elections Sparks Voter Intimidation Concerns

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers have been a focal point of scrutiny, particularly following their confrontation with protesters outside the Delaney Hall detention facility in Newark, New Jersey, on June 6. Since his return to office for a second term, President Donald Trump has pursued a vigorous campaign to identify and deport undocumented immigrants, with ICE, a federal agency within the Department of Homeland Security, leading this effort. The agency has seen significant expansion under Trump, reporting 22,000 officers and agents as of January, a 120 percent increase in staffing. Bolstered by recent funding packages, ICE is now recognized as the best-funded federal law enforcement agency in the United States. However, the agency, established in 2003, has faced mounting criticism regarding its aggressive operational tactics and expedited hiring processes. Reports indicate that immigration agents, operating under ICE and other related agencies, have been involved in at least 25 shootings since the commencement of Trump’s second term, resulting in six fatalities. Furthermore, at least 60 individuals have died in ICE custody since January 2025. This record has raised significant concerns among democracy advocates and human rights organizations regarding ICE’s potential activities leading up to the November 3 midterm elections. Groups such as Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have expressed apprehension that the Trump administration might leverage ICE to intimidate voters, potentially deterring some from participating in the electoral process. A national poll conducted in September by the University of California, San Diego, revealed that 40 percent of respondents anticipate the presence of ICE agents near polling stations on election day.

Can ICE agents legally operate at or near polling stations?

Federal law explicitly prohibits the deployment of armed federal agents at polling stations, a measure echoed by similar provisions in some states. This federal prohibition, dating back to 1865, makes it illegal for any individual in the civil, military, or naval service of the United States to order or bring any troops or armed men to election sites. An exception exists if such force is deemed necessary to maintain peace at the polls or to defend against armed enemies of the United States. Additionally, federal laws forbid military members from interfering with elections and prohibit any actions aimed at intimidating voters. These regulations have been tested recently. During the primary elections for the midterms, there were at least two reported instances—one in San Antonio, Texas, and another in Ventura County, California—where ICE agents were observed conducting routine operations in proximity to polling stations. In both scenarios, the ICE agents departed upon the request of local police.

How has the Trump administration used ICE agents before the election?

Despite prohibitions against law enforcement presence near polling stations, advocacy groups contend that the Trump administration has utilized ICE agents for election-related purposes. Specifically, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), an office under ICE, has reportedly been directed to prioritize investigations into non-citizen voting, which is an illegal act, in the months preceding the midterm elections. Only U.S. citizens are eligible to vote in federal elections. Beginning in August, the Department of Homeland Security deployed HSI agents for field investigations in at least nine states to examine voter eligibility. Reports suggest these agents have gone door-to-door inquiring about citizenship and voting intentions. This week, a federal judge issued an order halting these investigations, citing the risk of U.S. citizens being wrongly implicated and subjected to intimidation, as well as a high likelihood of error in identifying alleged non-citizens. President Trump has cited non-citizen voting as evidence to support his unsubstantiated claims of widespread voter fraud, despite experts indicating that such fears are unfounded and that very few non-citizens actually participate in elections.

What has the Trump administration said about deploying ICE during the midterms?

Officials within the Trump administration have not ruled out the possibility of using ICE agents to prevent illegal voting, an effort that could extend to election day itself. When questioned by reporters in May about sending the National Guard or ICE to voting locations for the midterm elections, President Trump stated he would do “anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections.” Other administration leaders have made similar remarks. In September, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin affirmed that ICE would not patrol polling stations but suggested their presence might be justified for other reasons, such as responding to a threat or serving a warrant on a tracked individual. Attorney General Todd Blanche has questioned the controversy, framing it as a misdirected concern, and asked, “Why is there an objection to sending ICE to polling stations? Illegals can’t vote. It doesn’t make any sense.”

What has been the response from advocacy groups?

The rhetoric from the Trump administration has alarmed numerous rights groups, who fear that an ICE presence on election day could suppress voter turnout. On Tuesday, Human Rights Watch urged the Trump administration to prohibit ICE agents from deploying near polling stations or other midterm election sites. Philippe Bolopion, executive director at Human Rights Watch, stated, “ICE officers’ abuses have already seriously affected US citizens who have been stopped, beaten, detained, deported and even killed. Voters should not have to fear being caught in an ICE dragnet when they head to the polls.” On October 16, Amnesty International issued a similar appeal, emphasizing that “Eligible voters must have the meaningful opportunity to participate in elections without discriminatory and arbitrary barriers, intimidation by armed forces, or fear of harm when seeking to exercise their rights.”