Rumors of malfeasance spread on X despite no evidence, as election officials continue to fight off numerous legal challenges from the Trump administration in the last 48…

The government claimed voters would be confused by two candidates with the same name. A federal judge said the executive branch has no constitutional role in the…

The arrests were paired with comments from DOJ and DHS officials, threatening to investigate, arrest or prosecute tens of thousands of California voters if they vote in…

Three justices wrote in a dissent that longstanding privacy laws protecting sensitive personal data held by the government should prevent the use of the database.

One justice said the attempt to change the rules ahead of the 2026 elections would be "arbitrary and capricious” and violated the Administrative Procedures Act.

Peters still left the door open to working with Shasta County on elections and doubled down on her statements that electronic voting machines should be discontinued.

Shasta County registrar Clint Curtis told CyberScoop he needs Peters to help manage the county’s 2026 elections and he’s not concerned about her past conviction.

The rules have already been rejected by multiple state courts, but the Trump administration said it’s preparing in case of a favorable Supreme Court decision.  

The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily reversed an earlier decision through the shadow docket. 

Election officials are facing an impossible choice: follow federal directives they don’t trust, or risk becoming targets of a criminal investigation.