Trump fires independent elections workers in latest attack on U.S. election system

With months to go before the midterms, President Trump has wiped out the federal commission that helps states run elections, turning a legal power struggle into a direct test of who controls the rules of American voting.

Story Snapshot

President Trump has dismissed all remaining members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), a small but important federal agency that helps states manage elections.
The EAC is defined by law as an independent, bipartisan commission created by Congress to support, not serve, the president’s election agenda.
This move comes right after a Supreme Court ruling that gives presidents broad new power to fire leaders of independent agencies without needing a specific reason.
Democratic lawmakers and legal groups say Trump’s firings and earlier election order are a “power grab” that threaten free and fair elections and violate basic checks and balances.

What Trump Did To The Election Assistance Commission

President Trump has now dismissed the remaining commissioners of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, a federal agency that helps states improve how they run elections, certify voting machines, and manage voter registration forms. The two Democratic commissioners, Thomas Hicks and Benjamin Hovland, were told by email they were “terminated effective immediately,” while the lone Republican, Christy McCormick, was also removed, leaving the agency with no sitting leaders. This happened just months before crucial midterm elections, raising alarms among officials who depend on the commission’s guidance and grants to keep local election systems running smoothly.

The Election Assistance Commission was created by Congress in 2002 through the Help America Vote Act after the problems of the 2000 presidential election. Congress designed it as an independent, bipartisan commission whose mission is to help state and local election officials, not to run elections itself or set national rules. Because it is “assistance-oriented,” experts say it traditionally stayed out of political fights and instead focused on technical standards, best practices, and distributing federal money to modernize voting equipment.

New Supreme Court Power And Trump’s “Unitary Executive” Push

Trump’s latest move sits on top of a major Supreme Court ruling that changed the balance of power in Washington. In the case Trump v. Slaughter, decided in June 2026, a 6–3 majority struck down a law that stopped presidents from firing Federal Trade Commission members except “for cause.” The Court said the president must be able to remove his top officials at will so he can “faithfully execute” the laws, ending a 90‑year experiment with strong protections for independent agencies that began with the 1935 Humphrey’s Executor case.

Since returning to office in 2025, Trump has used this idea of a “unitary executive” to push far beyond past norms at independent boards and commissions. Reports show he has fired or tried to fire roughly twenty members of agencies that Congress thought it had shielded with “for-cause” protections, including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Federal Trade Commission, National Labor Relations Board, and even the Federal Reserve’s board. Supporters say this clears out unaccountable bureaucrats and restores democratic control; critics say it concentrates power in one man and guts the safeguards meant to restrain any president.

Why Critics Call This A Threat To Election Integrity

Long before these firings, Trump had already targeted the Election Assistance Commission in his March 25 election “integrity” executive order. That order told the commission to change the national voter registration form to require proof of citizenship and to cut off federal funds to states that did not use the new form. Legal experts argue that only Congress and the states can set election rules, and that neither the president nor the Department of Justice can simply rewrite voting procedures or oversee local election officials by executive order.

The Brennan Center for Justice describes the order and the larger campaign as a “grave threat” to the future of U.S. election infrastructure. Its research says Trump is trying to “direct, dismantle, and weaponize” agencies so the administration can bypass its real job of protecting elections and instead shape who can vote and how elections are run. The group notes that courts have already seen several lawsuits challenging the order and related actions, and warns that these steps are not only dangerous for democracy but “in many respects, illegal.”

Congressional Pushback And The Bigger Crisis Of Trust

Democratic leaders in Congress have reacted sharply. Senator Alex Padilla and Representative Joe Morelle, the top Democrats on key election committees, sent formal letters warning Election Assistance Commission and Federal Election Commission officials about Trump’s executive order and his growing control over independent agencies that oversee campaign money and federal elections. They said they have “serious concerns” and called the moves an “attempted power grab” with “dangerous implications for elections,” putting their objections on the record even though Republicans control both chambers.

#BreakingAlert
U.S. President Donald Trump has dismissed the remaining members of the bipartisan Election Assistance Commission (EAC), including two Democratic commissioners who were terminated by the White House and one Republican commissioner who resigned. pic.twitter.com/1N0BurowmF

— BB News International Washington DC (@bbnwashingtondc) July 10, 2026

For many Americans, this fight confirms a deeper fear: that the system is being bent by people at the top, not fixed for citizens at the bottom. Conservatives angry about past election problems and distant bureaucracies see Trump breaking the grip of unelected boards and long‑time “experts.” Liberals worried about voter suppression and minority rights see the same moves as a plan to rig the rules and punish opponents. Both sides, however, increasingly agree on one thing — the federal government’s checks and balances are not working as they should.

What It Means Going Into The Midterms

With the Election Assistance Commission now leaderless, states face real uncertainty. The commission’s staff can keep the lights on, but big decisions about voting system standards, registration forms, and grants normally need commissioners in place. Lawsuits from fired commissioners are likely, and courts will need to decide how far the new Supreme Court ruling on independent agencies really goes when applied to election‑related bodies.

In the meantime, voters on both the right and the left are left watching a familiar story: powerful players change rules in Washington while everyday citizens worry whether their vote will still count and whether anyone in government is truly on their side. Whether you see Trump’s firings as cleaning up a broken system or as a dangerous reach for control, they show how fragile our election guardrails have become, and how much depends on institutions most people barely know exist.