Experts Warn DHS Could Threaten Midterm Election Integrity

Local election officials across the political spectrum are warning that the Department of Homeland Security, under the leadership of Secretary Markwayne Mullin, may pose a significant threat to the integrity of the 2026 midterm elections rather than serving as a trusted partner in election security, according to NPR.

Concerns center on Mullin’s history of election denial, the appointment of election misinformation proponents to key DHS roles, the systematic defunding of cybersecurity infrastructure, and the potential deployment of immigration enforcement agents at polling places. The relationship between the federal government and local election officials has become deeply fractured, with many jurisdictions actively avoiding cooperation with DHS.

A Troubled Leadership at DHS

Markwayne Mullin, confirmed as DHS Secretary in March 2026, voted not to certify the 2020 Electoral College results on Jan. 6, 2021, writing beforehand: “[D]ue to all of the fraud and uncertainty surrounding the 2020 election there is no way I can vote to certify the Electoral College.” He was one of 147 congressional Republicans who voted against certification after the Capitol riot.

Mullin’s history of false election fraud claims has heightened concerns that have been building for more than a year. Before the 2024 election, former CIA operative Gary Berntsen — who has pushed debunked conspiracy theories about Venezuela stealing the 2020 election — said Mullin brokered a meeting at Mar-a-Lago so Berntsen could brief President Trump’s team on his theories.

Election Deniers in Key Positions

DHS’s current point person for elections, Heather Honey, was appointed as deputy assistant secretary for election integrity in August 2025. Honey ran Haystack Investigations, which misrepresented incomplete voter data in Pennsylvania to falsely claim widespread voter fraud. Trump cited one of her falsehoods — that Pennsylvania had “205,000 more votes than you had voters” — during his speech on Jan. 6, 2021, as reported by the Associated Press.

David Becker, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research, told AP that DHS used to have real credibility in its advisory role on elections. “What I’m concerned about is that it seems like DHS is being poised to use the vast power and megaphone of the federal government to spread disinformation rather than combat it,” he said.

The Dismantling of Election Security Infrastructure

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), created during Trump’s first term to protect critical infrastructure including election systems, has been severely weakened. Most election security personnel were pushed out or resigned in 2025, and the agency has been without a Senate-confirmed leader for the entirety of Trump’s second term. Trump’s FY27 budget proposes cutting $707 million from CISA and eliminating its election security program entirely, according to ProPublica.

Paul Lux, a Republican election supervisor in Okaloosa County, Florida, said the federal government has told local officials it is still providing cybersecurity services, but he has not heard of any counties that have actually received them. “You know, try calling somebody at CISA and see who answers the phone,” Lux told NPR. “Because at the end of the day, it’s been radio silence from CISA when we reach out about just about anything.”

The Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EI-ISAC), which provides cybersecurity tools to local election officials, had its federal funding zeroed out in 2025 as part of DOGE cuts. Membership has fallen to less than 20% of pre-cut levels, fracturing the collective collaboration that once existed among election jurisdictions.

ICE at the Polling Places

White House border czar Tom Homan has refused to rule out deploying immigration enforcement agents to polling places, saying on The Charlie Kirk Show: “If only U.S. citizens can vote, I don’t see the issue.” Deploying ICE at polling places is against federal law, according to the Brennan Center, which notes that federal law bans armed federal agents from being deployed anywhere an election is held.

At his confirmation hearing in March, Mullin said DHS agents would only be present at polling places if there was a specific threat at those locations. But critics note that the definition of a “specific threat” could be dangerously broad under an administration that has repeatedly questioned the legitimacy of American elections.

A Fractured Relationship with Local Officials

Numerous local election officials across the political spectrum are avoiding sharing voter data or security information with the federal government. Matt Crane, a former Republican county clerk who now runs Colorado’s election officials association, said: “I’m actively discouraging it. I don’t trust how the administration is using that data. I don’t trust that they’re going to keep it confidential.”

Crane summed up the sentiment of many of his colleagues: “All of this points to the fact that these are not trusted partners anymore. They’ve brought the fox into the henhouse.”

Jocelyn Benson, Michigan’s Democratic secretary of state and a candidate for governor, noted that states have had to rebuild their own networks to protect against foreign interference. “The actions of defunding and dismantling those protections speak for themselves,” she said. “And it’s meant that we as states have had to rebuild networks to protect our respective states from foreign interference. That’s not easy. And we can never replicate what the federal government has built and had done.”

What’s Next

With the 2026 midterm elections approaching and primaries already underway, the fractured election security landscape raises urgent questions. The EI-ISAC plans to stand up a virtual situation room for Election Day — but no one from DHS will be invited. Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) has introduced legislation to restore funding for threat-sharing services, but there is no indication the bill will gain traction in the current Congress.

Lux, the Florida election supervisor, offered a sobering assessment of the path forward: “[They’ll] probably be that uncle that we keep at arm’s length at Thanksgiving rather than giving him a big bear hug. But, you know, we’ll have to see. Certainly, the relationship has been damaged. And how long it takes to rebuild that trust will depend on how dedicated they are to trying to rebuild that trust.”

The 2026 midterms will serve as an unprecedented stress test of whether American election infrastructure can withstand not just foreign interference, but the erosion of federal protections from within.