The U.S. military will not deploy troops or federalized National Guard members to polling sites during the November midterm elections, Gen. Dan Caine, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed in a letter to Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) on Aug. 18. Caine also stated he has received no unlawful orders regarding the military’s role in election oversight.
In his response, Caine emphasized that state and local officials retain full responsibility for election administration and security. He added that the Joint Force has no plans to seize ballots, voting machines, or other election-related materials during the 2026 midterms. The letter follows a similar inquiry from Slotkin in 2020, when then-Chairman Gen. Mark Milley reiterated the military’s apolitical stance, stating that any election disputes must be resolved by courts or Congress, not the armed forces.
Federal law prohibits the deployment of troops to polling locations unless required to repel armed enemies of the U.S., per 18 U.S. Code § 592. While Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents are civilian law enforcement officers not bound by the same restrictions, other laws still govern their activities at polling sites.
Part 1: Immediate Action & Core Facts
Military Deployment Denied
Gen. Caine’s letter directly addressed concerns raised by Sen. Slotkin, who sought confirmation that the Trump administration would not deploy military personnel to monitor elections. Caine’s response was unequivocal: no federal troops or federalized National Guard members will be present at polling places, and no ballots or equipment will be seized by military forces.
No Unlawful Orders Received
Caine stated he has neither received nor expects to receive any unlawful orders regarding the military’s role in the midterms. This assertion aligns with prior statements from the Pentagon, including those from Gen. Milley in 2020, who underscored the military’s commitment to remaining apolitical.
Part 2: Deeper Dive & Context
Legal and Historical Context
Federal law explicitly limits the military’s involvement in elections. Under 18 U.S. Code § 592, troops may only be deployed to polling sites if necessary to repel armed enemies. The military’s role is further constrained by longstanding principles of civilian control over elections, as emphasized by Gen. Milley’s 2020 letter. These legal and institutional guardrails aim to prevent military interference in electoral processes.
Political and Public Concerns
Slotkin’s inquiry reflects broader Democratic concerns about potential military or law enforcement interference in elections. These concerns have been amplified by past rhetoric, including statements from former Trump adviser Steve Bannon, who suggested deploying ICE agents to polling locations. The Department of Homeland Security has previously denied plans for ICE operations at polling sites, and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles called such claims "categorically false" in 2023.
Differences in Enforcement Authority
While the military is barred from election-related activities, ICE agents operate under civilian law enforcement authorities. However, their presence at polling sites remains a contentious issue, with critics arguing it could intimidate voters. The distinction between military and civilian law enforcement roles has been a focal point of debate, particularly regarding the potential for voter suppression.
Election Timeline and Stakes
The November midterms will determine control of the U.S. House and one-third of the Senate, with all 435 House seats and 34 Senate seats up for election. The stakes underscore the sensitivity around election security and the potential for disputes, which Caine noted would be resolved by courts or Congress, not the military.
Senator Slotkin’s Inquiry and Follow-Up
Sen. Slotkin, a former CIA analyst, has been a vocal advocate for election integrity and has repeatedly sought assurances about military involvement in elections. Her 2020 inquiry to Gen. Milley and her recent letter to Gen. Caine highlight ongoing Democratic efforts to preemptively address concerns about election interference. Caine’s response included an offer to discuss the matter further with Slotkin or other senators, signaling openness to continued dialogue.
Administration’s Stance on Election Oversight
The Trump administration has consistently denied plans to use military or law enforcement to influence elections. White House officials, including Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, have dismissed claims of such interference as unfounded. The administration’s position aligns with Caine’s letter, which reaffirms the military’s adherence to legal and institutional boundaries.
Public and Media Reaction
Media coverage of Caine’s letter has varied, with some outlets emphasizing the denial of military deployment while others focus on the broader context of election security concerns. The response has been framed both as a reassurance to voters and as a response to political rhetoric suggesting potential interference.