Trump allies are urging President Donald Trump to use martial law or emergency powers to intervene in the Nov. 3 midterms. They cite alleged election fraud and foreign threats while openly linking intervention to Republican victory.

CNN examined the proposals Sept. 24, citing reporting by The Atlantic. Those reports do not establish that Trump has ordered an election takeover or decided to cancel voting.

In response, the White House said the outside figures involved have no role in its election policy, according to CNN. Those figures include attorney Peter Ticktin, broadcaster Wayne Allyn Root and former Colorado election official Tina Peters.

Separately, a Sept. 25 Supreme Court order allowed expanded voter-citizenship checks while litigation continues. The decision did not authorize emergency control of elections.

Trump allies discuss military control

Ticktin, a longtime Trump friend and attorney, discussed martial law on or around Election Day, The Atlantic reported Sept. 23. He also envisioned military control after a Democratic win, citing supposed vulnerabilities in voting machines to foreign adversaries.

“Either martial law, or step aside,” Ticktin told the magazine. When asked about unrest if Trump tried to overturn the results, he dismissed the concern.

“Believe me, our armed forces are a lot bigger than they are,” he said.

Root links emergency powers to victory

Meanwhile, Root has proposed using a national emergency to impose nationwide voting changes. In an Aug. 12 column describing his pitch to Trump, he said he urged the president to bypass the Senate.

Specifically, his proposed changes include photo identification, proof of citizenship and ending mail-in ballots and ballot drop boxes. Root claimed those steps would prevent Democrats from stealing the election.

“If President Trump does it, we win the midterms,” Root wrote.

Root’s own words therefore connect the proposed intervention to winning Congress, while presenting fraud prevention as the justification.

What Trump has said

Trump’s public comments span several months. In February, he called for Republicans to nationalize voting in at least 15 places, according to footage CNN replayed.

Later that month, however, he denied considering an election-related national emergency. PBS News reported the denial Feb. 27 after reviewing a 17-page proposal circulating among his allies.

By August, Trump gave a less definitive response when Root urged him to declare an election-related emergency.

“Let me just say that stranger things have happened. Okay? I’ll leave it at that,” Trump responded in the exchange CNN replayed.

Meanwhile, CNN reported that the investigations discussed in its segment had uncovered no evidence of large-scale vote-rigging or foreign interference. Those inquiries included reviews of voting equipment from Puerto Rico and election records seized in Georgia.

Supreme Court allows expanded citizenship checks

The Supreme Court’s 6-3 order in Department of Homeland Security v. League of Women Voters paused a lower-court ruling. As a result, the administration can resume the expanded program during its appeal.

The Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program, known as SAVE, now incorporates Social Security records and permits bulk searches. State and local agencies use it to check citizenship.

The majority concluded that a 1996 immigration law likely authorizes the information sharing despite other federal privacy restrictions.

However, the court also acknowledged federal limits on systematic voter removals within 90 days of an election. Individual citizenship inquiries remain permissible. The justices left the disputed application of those limits to noncitizen removals for a separate case.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. They warned that outdated records could burden or disenfranchise eligible voters, including naturalized citizens.

Emergency powers do not authorize an election takeover

The Constitution’s Elections Clause assigns authority over congressional election rules to the states and Congress. It does not give the president power to rewrite those rules unilaterally.

Moreover, a national emergency activates specific powers that Congress has authorized. Those powers do not include canceling or rerunning an election, according to Brennan Center for Justice legal experts.

Instead, the president must identify the law authorizing the action. Declaring an emergency does not suspend the Constitution or erase the roles of Congress, state governments and courts.

Martial law also differs from a domestic troop deployment. Under martial law, military authorities generally replace civilian government, the Brennan Center explains.

By contrast, the Insurrection Act allows military assistance to civilian authorities under specified circumstances. It does not authorize martial law or give the president control of elections.

In addition, the 20th Amendment sets a firm deadline: expiring House and Senate terms end at noon Jan. 3. An emergency declaration cannot extend those terms.

Separate mail-ballot restrictions remain blocked

The SAVE ruling did not reverse the court’s earlier action on mail-ballot restrictions. The two disputes involve different federal programs and legal questions.

USA Herald previously reported on the administration’s request for Supreme Court permission to enforce new Postal Service rules. Those requirements concerned ballot envelopes and voter-specific mailing information.

On Sept. 14, the Supreme Court declined to let the Postal Service enforce those restrictions, Reuters reported. Consequently, those rules remain blocked during litigation despite the administration’s separate victory on citizenship checks.

The midterm general election remains scheduled for Nov. 3.