President Donald Trump's potential plan to deploy his own personal army could be doomed to fail, with one CNN reporter revealing that numerous experts have saidPresident Donald Trump's potential plan to deploy his own personal army could be doomed to fail, with one CNN reporter revealing that numerous experts have said

Trump’s doomed midterms plot 'would never hold up in court': experts

2026/03/26 01:59
4분 읽기
이 콘텐츠에 대한 의견이나 우려 사항이 있으시면 crypto.news@mexc.com으로 연락주시기 바랍니다

President Donald Trump's potential plan to deploy his own personal army could be doomed to fail, with one CNN reporter revealing that numerous experts have said it "would not hold up in court."

Trump's MAGA allies have recently suggested that his decision to deploy federal immigration agents to airports dealing with TSA staffing shortages is a trial run for deploying the same agents to polling places during midterm voting in November. Steve Bannon, the one-time adviser to the president and prominent MAGA advocate, has made such suggestions frequently, claiming that the federal agents would be needed to prevent non-citizens from voting.

Trump himself has long claimed that non-citizens, and undocumented immigrants in particular, are committing widespread voter fraud in the U.S., despite every major study into the claim finding that such fraud is extremely rare. He is currently pushing for the SAVE America Act in Congress, which would hugely alter the documentation requirements for voting, and has not officially stated that he plans to deploy ICE and CBP agents to polling places, but fears remain that he is keeping the plan in mind should his other efforts to influence the midterms fail.

Speaking on the matter during a CNN segment on Wednesday with host Dana Bash, correspondent Gabe Cohen explained why such a deployment of federal forces would be illegal and what experts have told him about the likelihood that the plan will succeed in court.

"What federal law says — and that's 18 U.S. Code, section 592 ... that armed federal officers or the military are not allowed at any location where an election is happening unless such force be necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States," Cohen explained. "So that's what the federal law says. Now, could the president and the administration argue that, well, there is a threat, whether it's foreign interference, whether it's the idea of non-citizens voting, or whatever evidence that they've obtained over time, is it gangs, drugs? Could there be that emergency?"

He continued: "Well, the state election officials I've talked to, the voting rights attorneys I've talked to, say that would never hold up in court... That would be struck down. There would be repercussions, but it could create some chaos, obviously, along the way, especially given what we have seen with ICE in recent months."

Cohen stressed that while the administration has not confirmed such plans, certain officials, when pressed further, have never denied that they would be employed.

He also responded to the critiques some Republicans have made, wondering why Democrats are concerned about immigration officers being present at polling locations if, as they have argued, non-citizens are not actually showing up at them to vote. As Cohen argued, the presence of these agents could be seen as intimidation for all voters, given how often these agents have gone after lawful U.S. citizens.

"First off, I would say it's not just Democrats who are worried about that," Cohen said. "But beyond that, beyond the federal law issues here, there are also concerns that this could be seen as voter suppression or voter intimidation. Just look at what happened in Minneapolis when officers were clashing with not just undocumented migrants, but also U.S. citizens. Citizens who were out in the streets, where some U.S. citizens were detained, some were injured. A couple were even killed."

He continued: "And so even though most of the state officials I've talked to or voting rights attorneys I've talked to, have said this feels unlikely, they're still preparing. They're preparing swift legal arguments in case there is a deployment, and they need an emergency order. They're preparing local law enforcement on how to address potential federal overreach. And then, of course, preparing poll workers for if officers do show up."

  • george conway
  • noam chomsky
  • civil war
  • Kayleigh mcenany
  • Melania trump
  • drudge report
  • paul krugman
  • Lindsey graham
  • Lincoln project
  • al franken bill maher
  • People of praise
  • Ivanka trump
  • eric trump
시장 기회
Notcoin 로고
Notcoin 가격(NOT)
$0,0003818
$0,0003818$0,0003818
-0,46%
USD
Notcoin (NOT) 실시간 가격 차트
면책 조항: 본 사이트에 재게시된 글들은 공개 플랫폼에서 가져온 것으로 정보 제공 목적으로만 제공됩니다. 이는 반드시 MEXC의 견해를 반영하는 것은 아닙니다. 모든 권리는 원저자에게 있습니다. 제3자의 권리를 침해하는 콘텐츠가 있다고 판단될 경우, crypto.news@mexc.com으로 연락하여 삭제 요청을 해주시기 바랍니다. MEXC는 콘텐츠의 정확성, 완전성 또는 시의적절성에 대해 어떠한 보증도 하지 않으며, 제공된 정보에 기반하여 취해진 어떠한 조치에 대해서도 책임을 지지 않습니다. 본 콘텐츠는 금융, 법률 또는 기타 전문적인 조언을 구성하지 않으며, MEXC의 추천이나 보증으로 간주되어서는 안 됩니다.

추천 콘텐츠

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

The post Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The cryptocurrency world is buzzing with a recent controversy surrounding a bold OpenVPP partnership claim. This week, OpenVPP (OVPP) announced what it presented as a significant collaboration with the U.S. government in the innovative field of energy tokenization. However, this claim quickly drew the sharp eye of on-chain analyst ZachXBT, who highlighted a swift and official rebuttal that has sent ripples through the digital asset community. What Sparked the OpenVPP Partnership Claim Controversy? The core of the issue revolves around OpenVPP’s assertion of a U.S. government partnership. This kind of collaboration would typically be a monumental endorsement for any private cryptocurrency project, especially given the current regulatory climate. Such a partnership could signify a new era of mainstream adoption and legitimacy for energy tokenization initiatives. OpenVPP initially claimed cooperation with the U.S. government. This alleged partnership was said to be in the domain of energy tokenization. The announcement generated considerable interest and discussion online. ZachXBT, known for his diligent on-chain investigations, was quick to flag the development. He brought attention to the fact that U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce had directly addressed the OpenVPP partnership claim. Her response, delivered within hours, was unequivocal and starkly contradicted OpenVPP’s narrative. How Did Regulatory Authorities Respond to the OpenVPP Partnership Claim? Commissioner Hester Peirce’s statement was a crucial turning point in this unfolding story. She clearly stated that the SEC, as an agency, does not engage in partnerships with private cryptocurrency projects. This response effectively dismantled the credibility of OpenVPP’s initial announcement regarding their supposed government collaboration. Peirce’s swift clarification underscores a fundamental principle of regulatory bodies: maintaining impartiality and avoiding endorsements of private entities. Her statement serves as a vital reminder to the crypto community about the official stance of government agencies concerning private ventures. Moreover, ZachXBT’s analysis…
공유하기
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:13
TRM Labs Launches Revolutionary AI Agent for Natural Language On-Chain Analysis

TRM Labs Launches Revolutionary AI Agent for Natural Language On-Chain Analysis

BitcoinWorld TRM Labs Launches Revolutionary AI Agent for Natural Language On-Chain Analysis San Francisco, March 2025 – Cryptocurrency analytics leader TRM Labs
공유하기
bitcoinworld2026/03/26 03:00
Unlocking SEO, GEO & AEO: The Future of Search Optimization

Unlocking SEO, GEO & AEO: The Future of Search Optimization

No user will click links while browsing the internet. Instead, they want to see immediate payback. AI-enabled search engines, such as Google AI overview, ChatGPT
공유하기
Techbullion2026/03/26 02:49