The right to vote was won through generations of feminist activism, and it remains one of our most powerful tools for shaping the future. Here’s how to protect it in the 2026 midterms.

The ability to participate in free and fair elections is arguably the most essential American right. Yet on Jan. 6, 2021, the nation watched as a mob overran the Capitol. In an act designed to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power from one president to the next, they attacked law enforcement officers who were there to protect the building and members of Congress inside. Rioters desecrated the Capitol. Our vote and our democracy seemed fragile that day and in the days that followed.

Historically, turnout numbers in American elections are low compared to other democratic countries. In 2016, the Pew Research Center ranked the U.S. 31 out of 35 countries in voter turnout. Participation usually peaks in presidential elections and is lower in midterm and off-year races. The turnout in presidential races this century has typically landed somewhere between 50 and 60 percent of the eligible population.

In 2008, the year President Barack Obama was first elected, it was 61.6 percent.

In 2020, when Americans elected Joe Biden, it hit 66.6 percent, the highest turnout since 1900.

In 2024, it was 63.9 percent.

Increasing political polarization has sent more Americans to the polls in recent election cycles. But even in cycles when interest is heightened, nearly 40 percent of Americans don’t vote.

The current midterm election cycle seems to be defying that history. Democratic turnout in the primaries is the highest it has been in decades.

At the same time, something new and alarming is happening: President Donald Trump is trying to create a role for the president in running and overseeing elections. That’s not how the Constitution works. As Michael Waldman, president and CEO of the Brennan Center, writes, “The Constitution is unambiguous: States run elections. Presidents have no role.”

Trump doesn’t see it that way. He has called for the “nationalization” of elections, saying, “A state is an agent for the federal government in elections. I don’t know why the federal government doesn’t do them anyway.” He has said it’s a “disgrace” how “horribly” some states run elections.

The effort to interfere with the November midterms isn’t going to consist of a single, dramatic event on Election Day. It is what we are already seeing: a combination of efforts by Trump and his supporters to make it more difficult to vote, to create confusion about who is eligible to vote, to pressure state and local officials, and to manufacture uncertainty. As Jan. 6 proved, distrust among the American people makes it easier for an administration to contest election results they don’t like. And the Trump administration is doing all of this with an eye toward shifting as much control over elections as possible from the states to the federal government.

The Founding Fathers knew what they were doing when they decentralized control of elections, leaving it with the states. They were making it far more difficult for a national leader to meddle in the outcome of an election.

Despite what the current president thinks, the states aren’t agents of the federal government when it comes to holding elections. The Elections Clause of the Constitution gives state legislatures control over the “times, places and manner of holding elections,” subject only to congressional—not presidential—action. Congress can pass laws like the Voting Rights Act that further extend and protect the right to vote.

Trump tried to strong-arm Congress into passing a law called the SAVE Act that would have, among other things, required additional identification to register, making it far more cumbersome for many eligible Americans to vote. The House passed the act in February, but it has so far failed to garner enough Republican support to pass in the Senate, amid widespread public opposition.

Trump also tried to get around his lack of constitutional power over elections by resorting to presidential edicts designed to give the executive branch greater control over voting, like Executive Order 14399, Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections. This order directs multiple federal agencies to create statewide lists of confirmed adult U.S. citizens and to send these lists to each state’s election officials. It also orders the U.S. Postal Service to develop and adopt new national standards so as not to deliver or transmit a federal mail-in ballot from a registered voter who is not on a federally approved voter list.

States and voting-rights groups challenged the order and the Postal Service rule in federal court; judges issued preliminary injunctions blocking the rule’s enforcement, and it remains blocked for the Nov. 3 midterms while the litigation continues.

Despite the lack of new federal controls the president has tried to impose, more than a dozen states have voluntarily adopted restrictive measures aimed at voters, like requiring proof of citizenship in order to vote. The rules vary by state, so each of us needs to take responsibility for knowing how our state works to ensure we can vote. This is an ongoing process, and we cannot yet know precisely what the challenges will look like when voting begins, but we know they will be there. The administration is still pushing new measures, and court cases over which practices will be allowed are still working their way through the system. But we can already see where pressure is being applied to voters and election officials, and we can identify the kinds of problems that are likely to arise.

Here are the contours:

Registration

Check your registration now. Go to Vote.org or a similar site and make sure you’re registered. Take a screenshot and keep it in your wallet. Federal law prohibits states from removing individuals from active voter rolls within 90 days of an election.

If you haven’t already registered, do it today. Most states permit registration up to, and in some cases including, Election Day. Others are more restrictive. Be prepared for the possibility that the Trump administration, which continues to push the false narrative that noncitizens are voting in our elections, may try to require proof of citizenship or even in-person registration as we get closer to the election.

It’s already a federal crime for noncitizens to vote in a federal election. Data shows it’s a nonissue for election integrity. But the president has been obsessed since 2016 with spreading the myth of this type of voting fraud. After taking office for his first term, he claimed that 3 million to 5 million noncitizens voted illegally. In this election cycle, there has been a push inside the executive branch to back up his claims. The reality is that noncitizen voting is vanishingly rare and doesn’t affect the outcome of elections. The problems arise when this false narrative is used to make it more difficult for eligible Americans to vote.

Proving you’re a citizen may sound easy, even sensible, until you stop to think about what it really requires. It isn’t simple for many people. The Center for American Progress noted in a recent report: “A passport costs $165 to acquire for the first time, tens of millions of Americans do not have ready access to their birth certificate, and an additional 69 million women who have married do not have a birth certificate that matches their [current] legal name.” Successful passage of the SAVE Act or adoption of similar policies in states would require Americans to provide proof of citizenship in person, which CAP argues “would pose a challenge for millions of rural Americans. Some would need to spend hundreds of dollars flying to get to their elections office; others would have to drive as much as seven or eight hours round trip—all while voter registration would be set back decades for all Americans, with an effective ban on registering to vote through an online or mail-in application.”

The idea that noncitizens vote in large numbers defies logic. Few people would endure the trauma of entering this country without legal status, desperate to start a new life, only to throw it away by trying to vote in a situation where they would be sure to be discovered, prosecuted and deported, while having no chance of affecting the outcome of the election. Logic supports the lack of statistical data showing that noncitizens are changing election results. But that hasn’t stopped the administration from trying to use these claims to make it more difficult for Americans to vote.

Mail Voting

Millions of Americans, including the president, vote by mail. Nearly one in five registered Republicans voted by mail in 2024, along with one in four Democrats. But Trump has long attacked mail ballots, and his executive order and related efforts suggest that mail voting will remain a target in the coming months.

The Brennan Center’s Wendy Weiser explained the safety of mail voting like this:

“The president’s attacks on mail voting have nothing to do with any real problems with the practice. American elections have featured mail voting in some form or another dating back to the Civil War. Over time, the practice expanded so that by 2016, 40 percent of voters cast mail ballots, in red states, blue states and purple states alike. The practice was backed by a broad bipartisan consensus—and for good reason. Not only is it convenient and cost effective, but it is also safe, protected by many layers of security features, including bar coding and careful verification procedures by election officials. Years of studies and investigations have proved our mail voting systems do a great job of preventing malfeasance.”

Trump originally envisioned having federal agencies create statewide lists of eligible voters and then restricting mail-in ballots to those on the lists. It’s easy to imagine mistakes arising from similar names and all other sorts of errors that would prevent eligible citizens from voting, especially with hastily cobbled-together lists and little time to sort out problems.

On Sept. 4, a federal judge in Massachusetts blocked the Postal Service’s new mail ballot rule. The Supreme Court denied the Trump administration’s emergency request to lift that injunction on Sept. 14, leaving the rule blocked for the November midterms while the case continues.

The bottom line: You need to know your own state’s rules and deadlines.

Certification

We should expect pressure on county boards and state officials in closely contested races. The lessons of the 2020 election and Jan. 6 were not lost on election deniers. If they cannot stop people from voting, they could try to stop lawful results from being certified.

Intimidating Election Workers

Election workers have been threatened and harassed for years now. That matters. A system cannot function if experienced people are driven out by disinformation and fear.

In early July, the Department of Justice “sent letters to top election officials in all 50 states and D.C. … warning they could face criminal prosecution over possible noncitizen voting,” according to Democracy Docket.

Community election workers could choose to opt out of participating this election cycle to avoid the risk of prosecution if something out of their control goes wrong—or is perceived to. Fewer election workers could mean longer lines, more chaos and, ultimately, more difficulty when eligible citizens try to vote.

The DOJ

A Justice Department that is used as a political weapon can affect elections without even filing a case in court. Investigations, subpoenas, public statements and selective enforcement can all be used to intimidate election officials or create a narrative of criminality where none exists.

There are problems to be faced, but there is also good news: Activists, lawyers and citizens are not waiting until November to protect the vote. The legal infrastructure to do that is already being built. Voting rights lawyers and state attorneys general are going to court, navigating legal issues like whether a matter is “ripe”—far enough along for a court to decide—as best they can so issues can be decided well in advance of the election. Nonprofit organizations and trained volunteers are preparing for the kinds of disputes that are likely to arise. We see some of that preparation in the lawsuits that are challenging Trump’s executive orders. But other parts of this effort are less visible: hotlines, poll-monitor training, rapid-response teams, emergency litigation plans and state-by-state voter education.

The Election Protection coalition will give voters somewhere to turn in real time if problems emerge. There will be trained people ready to respond if a voter has issues with voting machines, if a polling place is closed or if someone is intimidating voters.

This work isn’t glamorous. It is more like democracy’s underbelly, its plumbing. If it’s done correctly, most people never notice it happening. But make sure you jot down one of the coalition’s toll-free numbers and carry it with you on Election Day. Knowing how to get help can make all the difference in whether votes get counted.

You don’t need to be a constitutional law scholar to make a difference. It just takes a desire to be useful, to engage in democracy and become a participant, not a bystander. Know your state’s rules and deadlines for registering. Research whether you can vote early or by mail. Help the people around you, who may be less informed, do the same. Volunteer as a poll worker if you can. Volunteer to do election protection work if you are a lawyer, law student, retired lawyer or simply someone willing to be trained.

Finally, consider the effects of simple friction, of making it increasingly difficult to vote so that at some point eligible people just opt out. Maybe it’s fewer days of early voting that make it more difficult for working moms who don’t get paid time off to vote. Or maybe it’s concerns that the administration will deploy Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to the polls (which would be illegal) and that even citizens could be threatened or arrested, so it’s too risky to vote.

Or the goal may be to create confusion and suspicion. Disinformation that causes voters to lose confidence in the results of elections can keep people from voting. In a close election, that can be enough. Narratives that suggest your vote doesn’t matter or that it won’t be counted and that encourage people to “sit this one out” are a significant form of voter suppression and one that it’s up to each of us to push back against.

The story of 2026 won’t be written by people trying to suppress the vote. It is our story and it will be for the voters to write. It will be written by people who check in advance to make sure they’re registered and then help their friends and family do the same. History will be made by lawyers who answer phones, election workers who follow the law, judges who decide cases based on the evidence, and citizens who refuse to be intimidated and insist on exercising their right to vote. Our participation is essential.

Voting is a right, not a privilege. It should be easy for eligible Americans to vote. We shouldn’t have to jump through hoops, but the reality is that voters need to plan ahead to avoid obstacles set by the administration throughout this election cycle.

If you’re tempted to think it’s just not worth the trouble, that’s what they’re aiming for, discouraging voters so much that they opt out of the process. Remember, no one would try so hard to keep you from voting if your vote weren’t so powerful.

This article also appears in the Fall 2026 issue of Ms. magazine.

*

A note from Ms. editors: We want to hear from you for The Majority, a new campaign collecting stories about how reproductive freedom has enabled readers to build the lives they want and need.

Poll after poll shows a majority of Americans support reproductive healthcare access. Yet public debate overlooks the lives shaped by abortion access, contraception, IVF, miscarriage care, maternal healthcare or comprehensive sex education—countless women who chose to pursue an education, have children, not have children, protect their health and chart their own future. What’s your reproductive freedom story? Add your voice. Together, these stories will help show not only why reproductive freedom remains a majority value, but also what it makes possible.