Two coalitions of election officials, civil-rights organizations and labor unions have filed federal lawsuits seeking to prevent armed federal officers from appearing at polling places during the 2026 midterm elections. The legal challenges follow repeated statements from Trump administration officials that federal agents could be present at voting locations. President Donald Trump said in May that he would do “anything necessary” to ensure what he called “honest” elections. Earlier this month, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents could serve warrants at polling places. Border czar Tom Homan later said agents would not be “sweeping polling places,” while declining to eliminate concerns raised by earlier comments. Federal law prohibits government interference and voter intimidation at polling sites. One lawsuit, filed last week and backed by Denver Clerk and Recorder Paul López, argues that sending armed federal officers to polling places would violate a federal statute dating to the Civil War era. A second case, filed Friday in Washington, D.C., says the administration’s statements violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which bars intimidation intended to prevent someone from voting. The newer lawsuit was brought by nine organizations, including Mi Familia en Acción, OCA–Asian Pacific American Advocates and the NAACP, along with four national unions. The groups say the administration’s campaign to identify possible noncitizen voters, combined with intensified immigration enforcement, has created a climate of fear for Black, Latino and Asian communities. The complaint alleges that immigration officials are relying on flawed methods and unreliable data that could lead to U.S. citizens being surveilled, investigated or detained. A whistleblower report released earlier in the week similarly alleged that the Department of Homeland Security’s “Unlawful Voter Initiative” was moving rapidly and had mistakenly flagged citizens. DHS said its investigations are conducted “diligently and professionally.” DHS also told reporters that ICE is not planning operations targeting polling places, but added that agents could make arrests if an active public-safety threat endangered a voting location. FBI Director Kash Patel likewise declined at a congressional hearing to rule out federal agents at the polls, saying they would follow the law. Reports during primary elections described federal law-enforcement activity inside or near voting locations in several states. Those reports, and the administration’s shifting messages, have affected how voters view Election Day. About 40% of voters said they believed ICE agents were likely to be present at voting locations in their area, according to a University of California San Diego survey released this week. The survey found voters of color were substantially more likely than white voters to fear being questioned by immigration authorities while voting, even when they are U.S. citizens. Election officials warn that the fear alone could suppress turnout, regardless of whether agents ultimately appear. López said voters have repeatedly asked him what they should do if federal agents arrive at a polling place. He said Denver election officials have prepared a response plan and that agents attempting to intimidate voters could face arrest and prison sentences. Brian Netter, legal director of Democracy Forward, called the administration’s statements a “striking and disturbing departure from settled U.S. law.” Bethany Li, executive director of the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said the situation echoed the intimidation of Black voters that helped spur passage of the Voting Rights Act. Héctor Sánchez Barba, president and CEO of Mi Familia en Acción, urged voters to learn their rights, make a voting plan and participate. The lawsuits ask federal courts to clarify that federal officers cannot use polling places as venues for immigration enforcement or intimidation.