State and Federal Powers Clash as 2026 Elections Approach
As the 2026 midterm elections draw closer, a complex legal and political landscape is emerging, marked by potential clashes between state and federal authority over election administration. Concerns are rising over possible interference in election results, particularly from former President Trump and his allies, as state election officials brace for potential challenges.
State Court Report recently launched an Election 2026 hub to provide ongoing coverage of judicial elections, ballot measures, and state election litigation. The hub aims to clarify the legal framework surrounding elections, especially given recent claims of expanded presidential power.
A core principle at stake is the constitutional division of power regarding elections. According to analysis published by State Court Report, the U.S. Constitution does not grant the president authority to rewrite election laws or alter state laws governing how elections are run. State and local governments retain primary responsibility for setting election rules, registering voters, managing polling places, and counting ballots. While Congress can establish national standards, the president’s role is limited.
The Trump administration has signaled its intention to influence election rules, including pushing for changes to congressional districts and challenging the security of voting machines and mail-in voting. Simultaneously, the Department of Justice is pursuing legal action against 24 states and Washington, D.C., demanding access to voter registration lists and other election-related records. Federal courts in California, Michigan, and Oregon have already rejected these claims, but the disputes raise fundamental questions about the balance of power in the U.S. Federal system.
State courts are also expected to play a critical role in resolving election-related disputes. Historically, the vast majority of election cases have been heard in state courts, addressing issues such as voter eligibility, election rules, and ballot counting procedures. This trend is expected to continue in 2026.
Recent cases highlight the potential for postelection litigation to shape election outcomes. In North Carolina, a dispute over a 2024 state Supreme Court election ultimately led to a federal court intervention, reaffirming the constitutional principle that states cannot alter election rules after voting has begun.
Redistricting battles are also fueling litigation. The Missouri Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in March regarding the constitutionality of a mid-decade congressional map enacted by the state legislature. A trial court in Missouri is also considering whether the map should be suspended pending a voter referendum. In Virginia, a trial court blocked a proposed constitutional amendment to redraw the state’s congressional map, citing violations of the state constitution, a decision currently under appeal.
New York is also facing redistricting challenges, with a trial court ruling that one of the state’s congressional districts violated a 2014 state constitutional amendment prohibiting racial vote dilution. The ruling is currently stayed pending appeal.
Beyond redistricting, state courts will likely address disputes related to ballot measures, including citizen initiatives seeking to change state constitutions or establish new laws. State courts play a crucial role in determining whether proposed measures meet signature requirements and assessing ballot language.
Several state constitutional amendments will be on the ballot this year, including proposals related to abortion rights in Nevada, and Missouri. In Kansas, voters will decide whether to change the state’s judicial selection process, potentially shifting from a merit-based system to judicial elections.
The stakes are particularly high in state supreme court elections, with 65 seats on state highest courts up for grabs in 32 states in 2026. These races are attracting increased attention and funding, with powerful interest groups and the public becoming more engaged in judicial politics. Key races to watch include those in Montana, North Carolina, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Washington.
As Alicia Bannon, editor in chief of State Court Report and director of the Judiciary Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, notes, state courts play a “powerful role in shaping the U.S. Election landscape.” State Court Report will continue to track and analyze these developments throughout the 2026 election cycle.
