As Texans begin voting in closely watched midterm elections, President Donald Trump has left open the possibility of declaring a national security emergency related to the midterm elections.
The prospect raises questions about how much power the president and federal government have over elections in Texas, where Republicans have won every statewide election for more than three decades. However, recent polls show a close Senate race between Republican Sen. Ken Paxton and Democrat James Talarico.
But in reality, the president and federal government have limited power over how Texas runs its elections or determines the winners.
Elections are largely run by state and local governments, which count the votes, resolve disputes and certify the winners. The federal government can enforce federal election laws and investigate potential crimes, but it doesn’t have the authority to simply approve or reject a state’s election results.
“There’s really no federal authority over determining the validity of an election,” said Derek Muller, an election law professor at the University of Notre Dame. “The federal government doesn’t run the election, it oversees it. It doesn’t really have any role in this process of tabulating votes, canvassing the votes, certifying results. Federal officials are left out of that process.”
The idea of an emergency declaration was raised during an August interview with conservative commentator Wayne Allyn Root, who told Trump that an emergency declaration could allow the president to impose photo identification and proof-of-citizenship requirements and limits on mail ballots — all without going through Congress.
“Stranger things have happened,” Trump responded. “I’ll leave it at that.”
The exchange came as Trump has pushed for greater federal control over elections and continued to allege widespread election fraud. He also previously disputed election results, most notably after his loss to Joe Biden in 2020.
So what could Trump actually do under a national emergency? And how much power does the federal government have over how Texas runs its elections and certifies the results?
Could Trump use a national emergency to take control of the election?
No. Declaring a national emergency doesn’t give the president new powers on its own. Instead, it can unlock specific powers that Congress has already authorized under federal law.
However, none of the more than 130 statutory powers that can become available to a president during a national emergency allows the president to take over election administration or overturn election results.
That means an emergency declaration wouldn’t, on its own, allow Trump to cancel the election, impose new voting rules or reject a state’s results. The administration would still need to point to an existing federal law that authorizes what it wants to do.
The Constitution puts the responsibility for setting the rules for congressional elections primarily with the states, while giving Congress the power to change those rules. It doesn’t give the president a similar role.
Muller said an administration could try to use other emergency powers, such as those related to terrorism or homeland security, to justify intervening in elections. But he said the Supreme Court has generally interpreted emergency powers narrowly, making any attempt to broadly apply them vulnerable to a legal challenge.
“There’s no specific authority that allows you to seize voting machines,” Muller said. “There’s no specific authority that would allow you to disrupt how states are administering their elections. There’s no statutory authority that lets you disrupt Election Day.”
Can federal officials take control of voting machines or ballots?
Yes, federal investigators can seize voting machines or ballots as part of a criminal investigation, but they would generally need a warrant.
“That would involve you going to a court and going to judge, try to get probable cause, and demonstrate that before you were able to seize anything,” Muller said.
In September, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin asked the Justice Department to examine whether machines that tally votes using barcodes or QR codes provide a reliable paper record that can be checked through a manual audit.
But asking the Justice Department to examine voting equipment is different from seizing it. A president couldn’t simply order federal officials to take the equipment because he disputed an election result.
What can federal election monitors actually do?
The Justice Department plans to deploy federal election monitors across the country for this year’s midterms. As of Monday, it’s unclear who many will be at Texas polling sites.
Federal election monitoring isn’t new. The Justice Department has sent officials to polling places for decades to monitor compliance with federal voting laws.
According to Muller, their role is largely observational. Monitors can watch how elections are conducted, document potential violations of federal law and report what they find to the Justice Department. Federal officials can then investigate potential violations or ask a court to intervene when warranted.
The administration’s plans have faced legal challenges. The NAACP and other civil rights groups sued the DOJ on Friday over the deployment of federal law enforcement officers around polling places, arguing their presence could intimidate voters or interfere with voting.
Still, monitors don’t run elections, decide which ballots count or certify the results. Those responsibilities remain largely with state and local election officials.
“I think voters need to know that there’s a lot of fear-mongering out there with respect to the oversight and running of elections,” Muller said. “The results will be tabulated, we’ll have winners and we’ll move on to start thinking about the 2028 elections.”
So what if Trump or Texas officials dispute the results?
Simply disputing an election result doesn’t change it. That applies to the president as well as state officials.
Trump disputed the 2020 presidential election after losing to Biden. He and his allies filed dozens of lawsuits challenging the results in several states, but none changed the outcome of the election. Recounts and reviews also confirmed Biden’s victory.
In Texas, a losing candidate has two ways to formally challenge an election result: request a recount or go to court.
A losing candidate can file a recount petition, and no specific reason is required when the results were counted electronically.
A candidate can also file an election contest in court if they allege irregularities, like fraud. However, alleging that something went wrong doesn’t automatically invalidate an election result.
“He really doesn’t have any authority,” Muller said of Trump. “If the president does something lawlessly, then there will be courts that tell him not to do so, or there will be state officials that will resist the decisions that are attempted.”
Copyright 2026 KERA News