Steve Bannon told listeners his War Room podcast that ICE agents and active-duty troops could surround polling places during the 2026 midterms, urging a "nationalization" of elections and citing the 82nd and 101st Airborne under the Insurrection Act. There is no federal voter ID mandate, and Bannon’s proposal would amount to de facto nationwide enforcement by federal personnel. While Bannon is not a White House official, his remarks gain weight amid recent federal actions — including an FBI raid on a Georgia elections office and Justice Department requests for voter rolls — that raise legal and democratic concerns.
Bannon Predicts ICE Agents, Troops Could Surround Polling Places — Raises Constitutional Alarm
Steve Bannon, speaking on his War Room podcast, predicted that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents — and even active-duty military units — could surround polling places during the 2026 midterm elections if the White House pursues a "nationalized" approach to administering votes.
Former President Donald Trump earlier this week reiterated his support for a federal takeover of election administration, saying, "The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting." The comment drew uneasy reactions from several Republicans who noted that such a proposal conflicts with constitutional and long-standing election practices.
"You're damn right we're gonna have ICE surround the polls come November," Bannon said on Tuesday on his podcast. He added that he wanted to "call up the 82nd and 101st Airborne [Divisions] on the Insurrection Act" to "get around every poll and make sure only people with IDs... actually registered to vote and people that are United States citizens vote in this election."
There is no federal law that requires voters to present identification at the ballot box in every jurisdiction; voter ID rules vary by state. Bannon’s proposal would amount to a de facto nationwide enforcement of voter eligibility at local precincts, using federal law enforcement and possibly the military — an extraordinary and legally fraught scenario.
Former chief strategist to the president Steve Bannon speaks during the Semafor World Economy Summit on April 23, 2025, in Washington.(Kayla Bartkowski / Getty Images)
Context matters. Bannon is not a White House official and has a history of provocative statements aimed at mobilizing his audience. Still, his comments gain seriousness in light of recent federal actions: the Trump administration authorized an FBI raid on a Georgia elections office that resulted in the seizure of ballots and records, and the Justice Department has sought voter rolls from states that voted for Democrats in 2024.
Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker has publicly warned of the risk that a future Republican administration could send federal personnel to polling places under the pretense of "protecting the vote." Given that warning and the actions noted above, Bannon’s call for ICE and military presence at precincts is harder to dismiss as mere theatrics.
Why This Matters
Deploying federal agents or active-duty troops to local polling stations would raise immediate constitutional, legal, and civic concerns. The use of the Insurrection Act and military forces in domestic election operations would face intense legal scrutiny and could undermine voter confidence, particularly if such deployments were perceived as partisan or coercive.
Observers and officials should monitor rhetoric and policy proposals that could affect the safety, accessibility, and integrity of elections. Public debate, legal review, and clear safeguards will be essential if any federal role in election administration is proposed or pursued.
Help us improve.
