Blab News
Wisconsin Prepares for 2026 Elections Amid Rising Voter Confidence Concerns and Federal Ballot Seizure Fears
A recent poll by the Democracy Defense Project revealed that 30 % of Wisconsin voters doubt the accuracy of this year’s elections—slipping back to the pre‑2024 confidence level. The findings, presented at a WisPolitics luncheon in Madison, underscore growing uncertainty as the state gears up for its April 7, 2026 primary and the November 3, 2026 midterm.
The unease reflects a broader national narrative. Republican U.S. Representative Tom Tiffany, the GOP nominee for governor, has repeatedly promoted unfounded claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. He opposed certifying the 2020 results on January 6, 2021, and has spoken alongside other election deniers. While Republicans control Congress, they have debated bills that would restrict voting access. President Donald Trump has issued executive orders demanding that states hand over voter data, dispatched FBI agents to Democratic cities—including Milwaukee—to investigate 2020 ballots, and has reiterated the debunked narrative that immigrants are illegally voting.
Wisconsin’s election system, staffed by thousands of clerks, volunteers and state officials who manage polls, count ballots and certify results, faces these challenges head‑on. Ann Jacobs, a Democrat on the Wisconsin Elections Commission, warned that "scaring people in advance of the election is the worst thing we can do, because we don’t need to depress our own turnout." She added that voters cannot prevent federal action, but officials and advocates are preparing legal challenges.
TR Edwards, staff counsel at voting‑rights firm Law Forward, said that many fears "don’t exactly match what happens on the ground." He explained that Law Forward is focusing on three areas: the threat of federal seizure of 2020 ballots, building trust between election clerks and local law enforcement, and preventing Trump’s executive orders from taking effect.
Ballot seizures have already occurred in Fulton County, Georgia, and Maricopa County, Arizona, where the FBI seized ballots and election documents. In Milwaukee County, nearly 180,000 absentee ballots from the 2020 election remain in storage because litigation has delayed their scheduled destruction 22 months after the election. Republican Don Millis on the Wisconsin Elections Commission said the ballots "should have been destroyed" and that the state’s constitution protects the secrecy of the ballot.
Officials say the federal government could seize those ballots, exposing how Wisconsin voters cast their votes in 2020. Jacobs noted that voters have little recourse if ballots are seized, but that election officials and rights advocates are preparing court filings to block such actions. Law Forward has filed amicus briefs in lawsuits challenging Trump’s executive orders.
The presence of law enforcement at polling places is another concern. Edwards cited Riverside County, California, where the sheriff seized ballots and opened an investigation into the state’s primary. In Wisconsin, Racine County Sheriff Christopher Schmaling has been involved in election‑skeptic circles. Edwards said the goal is to build trust between cops and clerks so that "voters can cast ballots free from intimidation." He added that if law enforcement intrudes where it should not, the remedy is to file a lawsuit to remove them.
Voters can avoid potential intimidation by voting absentee, dropping ballots at a drop box or at a local clerk’s office. The state’s election officials have emphasized that absentee voting is a safe alternative.
Trump’s executive orders also target absentee ballots and voter registration. The orders require additional proof of citizenship to register, restrict absentee ballot use and tighten the U.S. Postal Service’s handling of mail‑in ballots. The orders are currently in federal court. U.S. Postmaster General David Steiner said the USPS will not deliver mail‑in ballots in states that refuse to comply with the order to turn over voter data. Wisconsin’s elections commission has resisted the orders, arguing that they would unlawfully expose personal voter information.
Jacobs said the executive orders and any USPS rules are likely to be challenged in court and are unlikely to be in effect by the fall election. Edwards noted that Law Forward is helping overworked local officials understand the legal landscape and that the firm has filed amicus briefs in the relevant cases.
With the primary approaching in less than 50 days and the midterm four months away, Wisconsin’s election officials, rights advocates and legal teams are preparing to defend the integrity of the process. The state’s election administration system, which relies on thousands of volunteers and clerks, is under scrutiny as federal investigations and executive orders raise questions about ballot security and voter access.
The current situation is one of heightened vigilance. Wisconsin officials are monitoring federal actions, preparing legal challenges to potential ballot seizures, working to ensure law enforcement presence does not intimidate voters, and contesting executive orders that could restrict absentee voting. The outcome of ongoing lawsuits and court rulings will shape whether these measures are implemented before the April primary and the November midterm. The state’s election authorities remain focused on safeguarding the secrecy of the ballot and maintaining public confidence in the electoral process.
The unease reflects a broader national narrative. Republican U.S. Representative Tom Tiffany, the GOP nominee for governor, has repeatedly promoted unfounded claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. He opposed certifying the 2020 results on January 6, 2021, and has spoken alongside other election deniers. While Republicans control Congress, they have debated bills that would restrict voting access. President Donald Trump has issued executive orders demanding that states hand over voter data, dispatched FBI agents to Democratic cities—including Milwaukee—to investigate 2020 ballots, and has reiterated the debunked narrative that immigrants are illegally voting.
Wisconsin’s election system, staffed by thousands of clerks, volunteers and state officials who manage polls, count ballots and certify results, faces these challenges head‑on. Ann Jacobs, a Democrat on the Wisconsin Elections Commission, warned that "scaring people in advance of the election is the worst thing we can do, because we don’t need to depress our own turnout." She added that voters cannot prevent federal action, but officials and advocates are preparing legal challenges.
TR Edwards, staff counsel at voting‑rights firm Law Forward, said that many fears "don’t exactly match what happens on the ground." He explained that Law Forward is focusing on three areas: the threat of federal seizure of 2020 ballots, building trust between election clerks and local law enforcement, and preventing Trump’s executive orders from taking effect.
Ballot seizures have already occurred in Fulton County, Georgia, and Maricopa County, Arizona, where the FBI seized ballots and election documents. In Milwaukee County, nearly 180,000 absentee ballots from the 2020 election remain in storage because litigation has delayed their scheduled destruction 22 months after the election. Republican Don Millis on the Wisconsin Elections Commission said the ballots "should have been destroyed" and that the state’s constitution protects the secrecy of the ballot.
Officials say the federal government could seize those ballots, exposing how Wisconsin voters cast their votes in 2020. Jacobs noted that voters have little recourse if ballots are seized, but that election officials and rights advocates are preparing court filings to block such actions. Law Forward has filed amicus briefs in lawsuits challenging Trump’s executive orders.
The presence of law enforcement at polling places is another concern. Edwards cited Riverside County, California, where the sheriff seized ballots and opened an investigation into the state’s primary. In Wisconsin, Racine County Sheriff Christopher Schmaling has been involved in election‑skeptic circles. Edwards said the goal is to build trust between cops and clerks so that "voters can cast ballots free from intimidation." He added that if law enforcement intrudes where it should not, the remedy is to file a lawsuit to remove them.
Voters can avoid potential intimidation by voting absentee, dropping ballots at a drop box or at a local clerk’s office. The state’s election officials have emphasized that absentee voting is a safe alternative.
Trump’s executive orders also target absentee ballots and voter registration. The orders require additional proof of citizenship to register, restrict absentee ballot use and tighten the U.S. Postal Service’s handling of mail‑in ballots. The orders are currently in federal court. U.S. Postmaster General David Steiner said the USPS will not deliver mail‑in ballots in states that refuse to comply with the order to turn over voter data. Wisconsin’s elections commission has resisted the orders, arguing that they would unlawfully expose personal voter information.
Jacobs said the executive orders and any USPS rules are likely to be challenged in court and are unlikely to be in effect by the fall election. Edwards noted that Law Forward is helping overworked local officials understand the legal landscape and that the firm has filed amicus briefs in the relevant cases.
With the primary approaching in less than 50 days and the midterm four months away, Wisconsin’s election officials, rights advocates and legal teams are preparing to defend the integrity of the process. The state’s election administration system, which relies on thousands of volunteers and clerks, is under scrutiny as federal investigations and executive orders raise questions about ballot security and voter access.
The current situation is one of heightened vigilance. Wisconsin officials are monitoring federal actions, preparing legal challenges to potential ballot seizures, working to ensure law enforcement presence does not intimidate voters, and contesting executive orders that could restrict absentee voting. The outcome of ongoing lawsuits and court rulings will shape whether these measures are implemented before the April primary and the November midterm. The state’s election authorities remain focused on safeguarding the secrecy of the ballot and maintaining public confidence in the electoral process.
