Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • Freed Up
    • The Soho Forum Debates
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Log In

Create new account

Elections

The Trump Administration's Long, Fruitless Hunt for Voter Fraud Comes to Rhode Island

The Justice Department’s election integrity tour has turned up nothing, while ignoring the threats to elections that voters actually fear.

Tosin Akintola | 9.9.2026 4:17 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
People use booths to vote | Envato/RawPixel/Adani Samat
(Envato/RawPixel/Adani Samat)

On Wednesday, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced it would be "observing polling locations today in Pawtucket, Rhode Island," the last stop on an 11-state tour to "secure ballot integrity, maintain transparency into the voting process, and enforce compliance with federal law."

Despite spending months foraging through the voting process of 11 states and hundreds of polling locations, the department has failed to find proof of President Donald Trump's dubious claim that there is widespread voter fraud taking place in American elections. Yet the Trump administration isn't planning to stop interfering anytime soon. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon said the department would "continue this work through the midterm general elections to assure the American public of the fairness and security of the voting process."

The American people are indeed worried about political pressure in elections, but the DOJ's injudicious campaign to root out voter fraud isn't connected to any of the people's fears. 

In a July Gallup poll on election concerns ahead of the midterms, 53 percent of Americans said they worried a "great deal" or a "fair amount" about ineligible voters casting a ballot. In contrast, 67 percent of Americans were worried a "great deal" or a "fair amount" about political leaders pressuring election officials to change election outcomes. 

If the Justice Department were truly serious about election integrity, Dhillon would ostensibly be taking a closer look at the president—a political leader who has already manifested Americans' fears by attempting to pressure election officials to overturn the 2020 election. 

Instead, the department has sued 30 states and Washington, D.C., for access to their full voter registration list, including driver's license numbers and partial Social Security numbers. With 23 of the lawsuits dropped, the efforts have been largely unsuccessful. Still, that hasn't stopped the department from requesting voter data from 48 states and the District of Columbia, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

The DOJ is just one arm of the federal law enforcement apparatus being deployed against voters. As part of Trump's executive order on election integrity—which, among other things, tasks federal agencies with compiling a list of federally verified voters in each state—the department will share any voter data it receives with the Department of Homeland Security to aid its immigration enforcement actions. Last month, CNN reported that Homeland Security Investigations—an agency within Immigration and Customs Enforcement—would be launching a "coordinated criminal voter fraud surge initiative to pursue investigative leads, conduct field interviews, and support timely prosecutorial review." 

There's little evidence of voter fraud nationwide. Analyzing cases over the last 30 years, Reuters found just 73 convictions for noncitizen voting in America, hardly a phenomenon that requires the Justice Department to put on a traveling roadshow to lean on state and local election officials. 

The Constitution gives the states authority to regulate and conduct elections, including the "supervision of voting, protection of voters, prevention of fraud and corrupt practices." Given the low levels of voter fraud in our elections, states are performing this duty quite well. There's no reason to involve the federal government in a paternalistic role that only serves the president's ego.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Urging SCOTUS To Reject AR-15 Bans, the Trump Administration Explains Why They Are Unconstitutional

Tosin Akintola is an assistant editor at Reason.

Electionsvote fraudCampaigns/ElectionsElectionsVoter IDElection 2026MidtermDonald TrumpTrump Administration
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (42)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fu Manchu   2 months ago

    All because a delusional guy can't admit he lost.

    1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      All because retards fall for the lie no fraud occurs despite the convictions and evidence. Thank you Rachel.

      Imagine being so retarded as to think voter fraud doesnt exist. Amazing.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 months ago

        no fraud occurs

        strawman alert!

      2. Nelson   1 month ago

        “ Imagine being so retarded as to think voter fraud doesnt exist.”

        Good thing no one says this.

        When the fraud rate is ~10,000 illegal ballots (3/4 of which are inadvertent) in an election with 150 million votes, it’s not a problem. No one has ever lost an election because of fraud.

        If you want to believe stupid things that there is zero evidence for, knock yourself out. Your posts about economics prove it’s your preferred practice.

        1. Clipton   1 month ago

          No one has lost an election because of voter fraud? How about Nixon in 1960?

          Voter fraud occurs in EVERY major election. Yet Dems always criticize efforts to prevent voter fraud by saying it's not "widespread," (whatever that means) as if voter fraud is OK unless it's too rampant. Why not support efforts to prevent voter fraud? What is the downside to that?

          1. Nelson   1 month ago

            “ No one has lost an election because of voter fraud? How about Nixon in 1960?”

            He did not.

            “ Voter fraud occurs in EVERY major election.”

            Yes. Voter fraud cannot be reduced to zero. Period. No one has ever claimed otherwise, despite the MAGA bullshit.

            There is no world in which voter fraud can be reduced to zero. It is an impossibility.

            If you accept that, the question becomes what is an acceptable level of all voter fraud and what is an acceptable level of intentional voter fraud.

            In the 2020 election, there were roughly 10,000 illegal votes cast, over 2/3 of which were inadvertent illegal votes (regular voters who were temporarily or permanently disenfranchised due to criminal convictions was the biggest cause of illegal voting).

            But let’s assume that there is 10x as many illegal votes as were discovered and all of them were intentional illegal votes. So now we’re talking about 100,000 illegal votes throughout America … in an election where 150,000,000 votes were cast.

            So even if we intentionally supersize illegal votes and pretend none of them were inadvertent, the illegal voting rate in the 2020 election was … 0.007%. Are you truly arguing that 0.007% is going to change anything?

            The real number is ~7000 inadvertent illegal votes (~0.0004%) and ~3000 intentional illegal votes (~0.0002%). Many of which were cast for Trump because he bleated on about it (there were four Trump voters just in The Villages who were caught intentionally casting illegal votes).

            Perhaps you think that those fraud rates are high enough to change an election. Perhaps you think those 3000 intentionally fraudulent votes (minus the four Trump voters in The Villages) were all part of an organized voting fraud effort.

            If so, you should google “motivated reasoning”. I realize this may create cognitive dissonance for you, but try it anyway. The more you can challenge your biases, the better your thinking will become.

  2. Agammamon   2 months ago

    The thing Tosin, is that they've been finding voter fraud. More than that, they've been finding deliberate policies that decrease the difficulty of committing voter fraud.

    1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 months ago

      they've been finding voter fraud.

      Yes they have, with about the same frequency as they have been finding Haitians in Ohio who eat cats.

      they've been finding deliberate policies that decrease the difficulty of committing voter fraud.

      Such as?

      1. DesigNate   2 months ago

        They found 6600 Haitians who eat cats? Somebody tell Vance!

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 months ago

          From what I recall, they actually did find one single Haitian who was accused of eating a cat, but it was not in Springfield (maybe Columbus). So, proportionally speaking, that does sound about right actually.

    2. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      And finding despite dozens of lawsuits and threats of arrest for anyone who looks for it.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 months ago

        By "threats of arrest for anyone who looks for it", what Jesse really means is "threats of arrest for people who break election security laws and violate voter privacy rules in order to go on a fishing expedition".

    3. Nelson   1 month ago

      “ The thing Tosin, is that they've been finding voter fraud.”

      They haven’t found any widespread voter fraud. They haven’t even found more than every other examination has found. It is a timy, insignificant number of votes.

      No system is perfect. If your argument is that the 10,000 illegal votes in an election with 150 million is a problem, you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

    4. Moderation4ever   1 month ago

      If you actually listen you will note that no one says there is no fraud, rather they say no significant level of fraud. What fraud occurs is noise in the signal. People know that trying to get noise completely out of a signal just degrades the signal or in this case degrades the right to vote.

      1. Agammamon   1 month ago

        'No widespread fraud'.

        Yet we're finding fraud every where. You could say 'spread widely'.

  3. Fats of Fury   2 months ago

    Go get your seeing eye dog, maybe he can explain it to you.

    Candidate Year Popular vote
    Kamala Harris 2024 (D) 75,017,613
    Joe Biden 2020__(D) 81,283,501
    Hillary Clinton 2016 (D) 65,853,514
    Barack Obama 2008 (D) 69,498,516
    Barack Obama 2012 (D) 65,915,795

    1. Murray Rothtard   2 months ago

      Yeah, population growth and COVID agitation are hard to comprehend if you're dedicated to ignorance.

      Trump's popular vote total in 2020 also smashed the previous record. Did he cheat too?

      1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        Lol. For fucks sake man. The excuses you retards make to ignore reality.

        Statistical outlier so far out it isnt explained.

        100% drops for votes for buden despite 55/45 splits.

        100% voting of retirement homes and nursing homes despite having invalid.

        Videos of paid homeless voting.

        Voter addresses to nowhere, literally buildings that dont exist.

        Also...

        Donald Trump received approximately 2.5 million more votes in 2024 (76.9–77.3 million) than in 2020 (74.2 million),

        Fucking retard

        Gop votea have followed a normal growth trend. Dems not so much. Want to know what changed? More gop observers and lawyers on hand.

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 months ago

          Want to know what changed?

          I seem to recall, in 2020, there was a pandemic, and a lot of voters who were very upset with the person in charge for, in their opinion, doing a terrible job managing the response to the pandemic.

          Why do you pretend that voting patterns should stay completely normal despite the presence of a once-in-a-century global pandemic? OF COURSE the election does not follow normal statistical trends, because it wasn't a normal fucking year.

        2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 months ago

          Also. It has been SIX YEARS NOW.

          If there had been some grand conspiracy in 2020 to stuff the ballot box in favor of Biden, by now SOMEONE would have blabbed about it.

          If there really had been "2000 mules" harvesting ballots, why haven't ANY of them bragged to their friends on social media about what they did to courageously stop Trump? Why can't you all identify even one of them by name?

          1. damikesc   2 months ago

            Georgia HAS blabbed about it. Look into the issues with Fulton County in 2020.

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 months ago

              No I'm not going to go search for some vague "issues with Fulton County". Provide a link or shut up.

              1. damikesc   1 month ago

                Fuck you, fat slob. Not my fault you're an uneducated imbecile whose mother would have been better off swallowing your dad during that drunken gropefest.

                It was widely reported. I'm not going to try and find your dick to hold it for you while you pee, either.

        3. Nelson   1 month ago

          “ Lol. For fucks sake man. The excuses you retards make to ignore reality.”

          Right? Trump and the MAGA idiots who believe … oh, wait. You’re saying the ones who believe facts and data are the retards and the ones who believe conspiracy theories and fake videos on the internet are the smart ones? What a retard.

    2. Jaydog   2 months ago

      And kamala harris only got as many as she did almost all entirely from California which was still "counting" over a month later, almost seemingly for the sole purpose to reduce DJT below the 50% pop total.

      1. Stuck in California   1 month ago

        I'm not saying I know there's voter fraud in California.

        But, even when a simple Primary takes weeks to count, nobody will trust you, you will never put to rest any doubts people might have. You may have a captured press saying "never proven" or "No widespread fraud" or whatever, but doubters absolutely won't believe.

        And I'm to the point where I don't know how much of that is on purpose (sowing seeds of distrust) and how much is pure arrogance. Because, California Democrats are remarkably arrogant. Like "We'll do it and FYTW" level of arrogance.

        1. damikesc   1 month ago

          And Reason wants systems like Alaska's, which are every bit as easy to corrupt as CA, to be done nationally.

          Not having a known winner within 48 hrs guarantees serious doubts about legitimacy. And having results that openly violate logic do not help.

  4. Dillinger   2 months ago

    >> ... is an assistant editor at Reason.

    writing like Boehm will get you nowhere. although I did see Emma Camp on tv the other day so I guess she wins lol

    1. Fats of Fury   2 months ago

      Emma was noted by Matt Walsh this week, pushing the notion that todays appliances are better than 1950s appliances simply because they're cheaper, but not mentioning that they don't last as long.

      https://youtu.be/lBeI5PzZkRo?t=536

  5. DesigNate   2 months ago

    “Fruitless”

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    1. mad.casual   1 month ago

      The voting habits and malfeasance of various strains of watermelons aside, they haven't find any actual fruit voting though... right?

  6. Moderation4ever   1 month ago

    As a poll worker I know that observers are always allowed and that they are allowed to observe and nothing else. Any interference with a voters or a poll worker and they can be ejected. So let them sit quietly and observe because that is all they can do.

    1. damikesc   1 month ago

      ...except Republican ones have been thrown out in prior elections...

      1. Moderation4ever   1 month ago

        Right, thrown out for violating the rules for observers.

        1. Moderation4ever   1 month ago

          For example: https://www.wpr.org/news/disruptive-observers-removed-from-milwaukee-area-polling-locations

    2. Agammamon   1 month ago

      Except for the observers who were removed. And the areas they were excluded from.

      1. Moderation4ever   1 month ago

        As I noted above observers have to follow the rules set down and will be excluded for violations of those rules.

  7. Truthteller1   1 month ago

    Fruitless? The fact that there is widespread voter fraud isn't even controversial in 2026. STFU you regime bootlicker.

  8. Bobster0   1 month ago

    Me and my buddies are counting the votes, and we happen to stick a few hundred thousand in here and there so our politician wins. Later, when investigators are looking for the people who voted fraudulently they don't find any because they don't exist. Thus, the vote count was valid. Duh.

  9. Liberty_Belle   1 month ago

    https://www.brookings.edu/articles/widespread-election-fraud-claims-by-republicans-dont-match-the-evidence/

    The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, has been monitoring election fraud cases state by state. Election fraud covers a range of activities — such as registering someone to vote and forging their signature, filling out an absentee ballot for someone who has died or moved away, voting while ineligible, or pretending to be someone else at the polling place and voting. They find that there have been 1,465 proven cases of election fraud — 1,264 of these resulted in criminal prosecutions and the remainder resulted in civil prosecutions, diversion programs, judicial findings, or official findings.

    These may sound like big numbers, however, they must be examined in context. The findings encompass more than a decade of data during which, nationally, hundreds of millions of votes have been cast.
    -snip-
    So, what’s going on here? Nothing. Confirmed conspiracy theorists never take no for an answer, so they will certainly insist that there was massive fraud or that prosecutors were bought off.

  10. TJJ2000   1 month ago

    Sorry, "Move along occifers. Nottin to see here."
    Doesn't work when mystery mail ballots run 80% contrast to In-Person.
    And ends up flipping election results over-night.
    FFS. Matching In-Person was the very ?integrity? basis used to allow mystery ballots in the first place.

  11. BigFish92672   1 month ago

    Moot. 99% of US voters supported a fiscal liberal - the worst kind of liberal - in the last POTUS selection. Put a fork in America. It's fully cooked

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Iowa Voters Don't Want Police or Flock Tracking Their Cars. Politicians Are Still Catching Up.

Davide Mamone | 10.24.2026 8:00 AM

Trump Wants To Force Data Centers To 'Make Their Own Electricity.' Deregulation Would Work Better.

Josh Pauzé | 10.23.2026 5:30 PM

The U.K.'s Online Safety Act Has Been a Failure. Regulators Want To Broaden It Anyway.

Meagan O'Rourke | 10.23.2026 5:05 PM

How Helping Someone Buy Drugs Can Send You to Prison for 20 Years

Jacob Sullum | 10.23.2026 4:50 PM

Under Proposed Treasury Rule, Corporate Homebuyers Who Don't Track Their Receipts Face $1 Million Fines

Christian Britschgi | 10.23.2026 3:50 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2026 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Reason

The All-Argentina Issue is Here

New from Reason: a look into what Javier Milei has accomplished and what it will take to make the most of Argentina’s window for real change. Out now for subscribers.

Subscribe & Start Reading Learn More