The state would argue that the president has no constitutional or statutory authority to interfere with state-run elections and that the order violates the Posse Comitatus Act.
Replies
Civilian resistance: In addition to court action, election officials and the public would likely resist the federal action, leading to civil unrest and a complete breakdown of trust in the electoral process.
sep 1, 2025, 4:22 pm • 0 0 • view
If the Govenor Of A State Orders State, County & City Law Enforcement with reserves to protect Ballots at election time and the President attempts to take ballots what would be the outcome?
sep 1, 2025, 4:29 pm • 0 0 • view
A conflict between a state governor's orders to protect ballots and a president's attempt to seize them would create an unprecedented constitutional crisis with several possible outcomes. State authority over elections is established by the Constitution, but federal law also sets standards.
sep 1, 2025, 4:30 pm • 0 0 • view
A president's attempt to seize ballots would be seen as an unconstitutional overreach of power.
sep 1, 2025, 4:30 pm • 0 0 • view
Decentralized system: The U.S. Constitution gives states primary authority over the "Times, Places, and Manner" of holding elections. This decentralized structure places the responsibility for election administration, including the safeguarding of ballots, on state and local officials.
sep 1, 2025, 4:30 pm • 0 0 • view
State law enforcement and National Guard: A governor's order to use state, county, and city law enforcement, along with the state's National Guard, to protect ballots is a legal exercise of their constitutional authority. The National Guard is under the governor's command in its state duty status.
sep 1, 2025, 4:31 pm • 0 0 • view
No unilateral power: The Constitution does not grant the president unilateral power to regulate or seize ballots. In the past, presidential attempts to direct federal agencies to seize voting machines were blocked by institutional checks, including officials within the Department of Justice.
sep 1, 2025, 4:32 pm • 0 0 • view
Federalization of the National Guard: The president can federalize a state's National Guard under very limited circumstances, typically to enforce federal law when a state is unable. A presidential order to seize ballots, however, would have no legal basis.
sep 1, 2025, 4:32 pm • 0 0 • view
Any federalized Guard members would likely refuse the order, or it would be challenged and blocked by the courts.
sep 1, 2025, 4:33 pm • 0 0 • view
Any DOJ official who followed such an unlawful order would be subject to court challenges and potential legal jeopardy.
sep 1, 2025, 4:34 pm • 0 0 • view
Prosecutorial powers: While a president can direct the Department of Justice (DOJ), the DOJ's authority is limited to enforcing existing federal law. Seizing lawfully cast ballots from state control is not a federal power.
sep 1, 2025, 4:34 pm • 0 0 • view