On November 3, 2026, the American people will decide the composition of the country’s legislative body, Congress. The midterm elections (henceforth “midterms”) have historically been perceived as a crucial political referendum on the president. They constitute one of the hardest “stress tests” that the president and his entire administration undergo, just two years after the presidential elections. Although the midterms do not determine who is going to be the next president, but rather who is going to represent them in the Senate and the House, they have traditionally been deemed as an opportunity for the American public to make its voice heard by expressing its judgment on the overall policy the President and the people of his administration have been following the past two years.
Under the current circumstances, the highly controversial policy decisions pursued by the Trump administration has made it seem almost inescapable that the Republicans’ loss of ground in the upcoming elections will exceed the losses regularly expected of any governmental political party in the midterm elections. Acknowledging that his public support is declining and his public image is slowly fading away, Trump has launched a plan of causing distrust and undermining the public’s faith in elections.
A naked attempt to control elections
In the U.S. federal legal system, one of the most significant and longstanding principles is embodied in Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution – commonly known as the Elections Clause. Under this principle, it is the states (emphasis added) that have the authority over federal election administration. Apart from the states, the Congress may also play a role in regulating the elections framework in some particular instances. The U.S. Constitution however makes no reference to the President or the executive with connection to the election administration.
Yet, the current President has once again shown his love to constantly attempting to control situations that fall – as a matter of principle – beyond the powers of any President. The first “victim” of Trump’s excessive exercise of presidential powers was the Congress. From the attack in Venezuela and the war in Iran to the trade and tariffs policy, Congress has been sidelined and all the lawful processes have been bypassed. Now, as the midterm elections loom, he is pointing his finger to the states.
On March 31, 2026, President Trump issued Executive Order (E.O.) 14399, entitled “Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Election”. Most particularly, the E.O. first calls the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to create state citizenship lists comprising all eligible voters, and hand them over to the states before the elections begin. Second, it requests the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to decline delivery of mail ballots to people not appearing on the abovementioned lists. After the issuance of E.O. 14399 strong reactions sparked across the country, with the vast majority of governors voicing concerns over the sound administration of the elections and some even speaking of a naked attempt of the federal government to interfere in the midterm elections.
Fortunately these reactions were not confined only to official statements and public speeches by Senate or House candidates, but they were brought before the courts, commencing a crucial legal “back and forth” between the Trump administration on the one hand, and two dozens of states and several civil rights groups on the other.
After the announcement of the E.O., 24 state attorney generals along with civil rights groups, filed a complaint requesting an injunction blocking the enforcement of the E.O. ‘s provisions. This legal battle was a real “roller coaster”. Everything was subject to change and none of the parties to the dispute had secured a court order that could satisfy them. One day a lower court was blocking Trump’s E.O. by issuing an injunction, and the very next day a higher court was allowing the administration to move forward, by putting a stay on the order of the previous court. This “back and forth” lasted for more than 2 months, creating legal insecurity and uncertainty. Ultimately, a few days ago the Supreme Court decided to erect a bar to Trump’s plans, making him furious.
His response (which was given via his favorite media, Truth Social) was nothing more than another open, frenetic attack to the judiciary and of course to the Democrats, accusing both of destroying the country, causing irreplaceable harm, incalculable damage, and so on and so forth. Nobody can say that such a response came out of nowhere, as President Trump is usually expressive about whether he likes or not the decisions of the Supreme Court. (see the Tariffs and the Birthright Citizenship cases) The Justices, on the other hand, know very well that Presidents might not agree with many of their rulings but that’s how things should be. If they were conquered by fear every time they had to side against the President, then justice would dispose of its impartiality.
Practical Implications
Unequivocally, mail voting has been consolidated in the United States, which has gradually shifted away from the traditional in-person voting. For instance, in the 2022 midterms as well as in the 2024 presidential elections, nearly 30% of the voters cast their vote by mail. It is plainly obvious therefore, that this voting method has gained prevalence. At the same time, being aware of the power hidden in this method, the current administration is trying to shape the elections framework to its standards. To that end, the administration is “armed” with a full arsenal of tools and arguments. Since his defeat in the 2020 presidential elections, Trump’s favorite recipe has remained the same: attributing a potential defeat to voting fraud that expanded mail-in voting induces. Under these circumstances, the American people need to realize that they have in their arsenal a far more effective “weapon”: their vote, which is capable of driving radical changes in the U.S. political landscape. We must never forget, however, that voting – apart from being a fundamental constitutionally vested right – is also a duty intertwined with the very essence of democracy. So, exercising the right to vote is about strengthening the democratic institutions.
Thrasyvoulos-Christos Kosmidis is an Undergraduate Student at the Faculty of Law of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. He is Co-Founder and Director of the Student Association for Public and International Law of Athens Law School..
