The Truth About U.S. Elections and the Myth of Widespread Election Fraud
The Misinformation Campaign Behind the Push to Restrict Voting
Repeated claims by President Trump that the 2020 election was "rigged" or "stolen" have been thoroughly investigated and consistently disproven. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), along with independent news organizations and civic platforms ((AP News, 2023; CBS News, 2020), Engage For Democracy, 2025), have affirmed the integrity of that election.
Yet myths about widespread voter fraud and election insecurity continue to circulate, sowing public distrust and shaping support for recent actions—namely, a presidential executive order and proposed legislation—both framed as efforts to protect election integrity. In truth, each relies on debunked premises and asserts authority that rightly belongs to Congress and the States under the Constitution. If enacted, they risk weakening the very voting rights they claim to defend.
Research underscores the real danger of such rhetoric. In Elite rhetoric can undermine democratic norms (Clayton et al., 2021),, the authors found that “exposure to norm-violating rhetoric about electoral fraud erodes trust and confidence in elections and increases beliefs that elections are rigged,” especially among Trump supporters.
Similarly, Online engagement with 2020 election misinformation and turnout in the 2021 Georgia runoff election (Green et al., 2022) warns: “Regardless of their behavioral consequences, the promotion of conspiracy theories regarding election fraud from the highest levels of government pose problems for continued democratic legitimacy. Such conspiracies erode essential democratic norms and threaten the peaceful transition of power.”
To protect our republic, we must rise above division and ground our civic decisions in truth. Democracy only thrives when citizens—regardless of political affiliation—share a commitment to facts, fairness, and the peaceful transfer of power.
How the U.S. Election System Works — and the Laws That Safeguard Against Voter Fraud
The U.S. election system is rooted in Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution, known as the “Elections Clause.” This provision divides responsibility between the federal legislative branch and the states for governing national elections (Constitutional Law Reporter).
The Role of the States
States establish the basic laws and procedures for voting. They determine voting methods, set time periods for early and absentee voting, and oversee how elections are conducted on or before Election Day. Local jurisdictions—over 10,000 of them—register voters, design ballots, arrange polling places, and count votes (Government Accountability Office).
This decentralized structure is a critical safeguard. Despite repeated false claims of nationwide election rigging, decentralization makes such manipulation extraordinarily difficult. As the National Conference of State Legislatures explains:
“The dispersed responsibility for running elections also makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to rig U.S. elections at the national level.” (NCSL, 2025)
The Role of Congress
Congress holds exclusive authority to set national standards for federal elections. It determines the official dates of elections, passes campaign finance laws, and enacts key voting rights legislation—such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965, National Voter Registration Act of 1993, and Help America Vote Act of 2002. It also controls funding for election-related programs and improvements. (Article 1, Section 4 - The Election Clause).
The Role and Limits of the Executive Branch
The executive branch enforces the laws Congress passes. It oversees federal agencies like the Department of Justice (DOJ)—which monitors for civil rights violations—and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which helps states bolster election security.
However, the executive branch cannot unilaterally change federal election procedures through executive order. That authority lies exclusively with Congress and the states (Article I, Section 4; ACLU, 2025; National Constitution Center; CATO Institute, March 2025).
Debunking the “Rigged Election” Narrative: Myths, Disinformation, and the Truth About Election Security
Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, individuals—including candidate and President Trump—have repeatedly cast doubt on the legitimacy of U.S. elections. These unsubstantiated claims have taken root in public discourse and fueled support for recent executive actions and legislation that undermine voting rights (ProPublica, 2024; PBS, 2024; NPR, 2024)
Understanding the truth is essential to preserving democratic integrity. Here’s a breakdown of common myths—and what the evidence really shows:
🔻 Myth: Widespread Voter Fraud Occurs in U.S. Elections
✅ Reality: Voter fraud is extremely rare and does not affect election outcomes. (Fortune, 2024)
Multiple independent studies have confirmed this, including one published in PNAS that debunked pseudo-statistical claims about widespread fraud. (PNAS, 2025)
Even the conservative Heritage Foundation’s own database—often cited by voter fraud alarmists—tells the same story. For example, in Arizona, only 36 cases were found out of over 42 million ballots cast across 25 years—less than 0.0001%. (Brookings Institute, 2024)
🔻 Myth: Noncitizens Are Voting in Large Numbers
✅ Reality: Noncitizen voting is exceptionally rare and has no measurable impact on elections.
A Brennan Center study of the 2016 election found just 30 suspected cases out of 23.5 million votes—or 0.0001%. (Brennan Center, 2024)
Michael Waldman of the Brennan Center put it plainly:
“It’s a cynical untruth, and it should be chased from the public square.” (Immigration Impact, 2024)
🔻 Myth: Mail-In and Early Voting Lead to Fraud
✅ Reality: These methods have been used safely and securely for decades.
A 20-year study by MIT found just 204 cases of fraudulent absentee ballots out of 250 million votes cast—just 0.00006%. (The Hill, 2020; Brennan Center, 2024)
🔻 Myth: Voting Machines Are Easily Manipulated
✅ Reality: Voting machines are subject to rigorous testing, security protocols, and audits.
Trump-appointed CISA Director Chris Krebs said clearly:
“There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.” (NPR, 2020)
Krebs later told CBS:
“It’s nonsense... there is no manipulation of the vote on the machine count side.” (CBS News, 2020)
🔻 Myth: Deceased and Ineligible Voters Are Casting Ballots
✅ Reality: Election officials maintain and regularly update voter rolls.
The rare cases where deceased individuals appear to vote are overwhelmingly due to clerical errors—not intentional fraud. (Wu, J et al; 2020; Crawford, K, 2020)
🔻 Myth: The 2020 Election Was Rigged
✅ Reality: The 2020 election was secure, transparent, and verified by multiple independent sources.
Audits, recounts, and bipartisan oversight all confirmed the results. CISA rejected claims of fraud or mail-in ballot manipulation. (CBS News, 2020)
False claims promoted by President Trump on social media were flagged for spreading election misinformation. (NPR, 2020)
🔻 Myth: Strict Voter ID Laws Are Needed to Prevent Fraud
✅ Reality: Impersonation fraud—the only type addressed by voter ID—is virtually nonexistent, while the harm caused by strict ID laws is well documented.
A 2014 Washington Post study found just 31 credible cases of impersonation out of 1 billion ballots cast. (Brennan Center, 2017)
Strict voter ID laws disproportionately disenfranchise eligible voters—especially racial minorities, the elderly, low-income individuals, rural residents, and naturalized citizens. (ABA, 2024; League of Women Voters, 2023)
A UCSD study found these turnout drops under strict photo ID laws:
Latino voters: –10.3 points
Multiracial Americans: –12.8 points
Strong liberals: –10.7 points, vs. –2.8 for strong conservatives
Researchers concluded:
“The effects of voter ID laws are eerily similar to the impact of measures like poll taxes and literacy tests… both serve to distort democracy and reduce the influence of racial minorities.” (UCSD, 2017)
Even conservative legal figure Judge Richard Posner later admitted that these laws were more about political advantage than preventing fraud. (NYT, 2013)
Conclusion
Voter fraud is rare, well-tracked, and already punishable by law. But disinformation about fraud is widespread—and dangerous. It erodes trust, disenfranchises voters, and undermines the foundational principle that every eligible American has the right to vote freely and fairly.
To protect democracy, we must commit to truth over fear, evidence over rumor, and inclusion over suppression.
The Executive Order: Framing Disinformation as Election Policy
In March 2025, President Trump issued an executive order titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections” While it appears to promote election integrity, it is in fact a deeply problematic attempt to override constitutional boundaries and limit lawful voter access.
Key Mandates in the EO:
Requires proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections
Bans counting of ballots received after Election Day
Threatens to withhold federal funds from noncompliant states
Expands federal oversight of voter rolls and election systems
The EO cites misleading comparisons to countries with centralized election systems and promotes the myth of "illegal vote dilution" through noncitizen voting.
Constitutional and Legal Concerns
Election Authority Belongs to Congress and States: Article I, Section 4 vests authority with state legislatures and Congress—not the executive.
Funding Threats Are Unconstitutional: NFIB v. Sebelius (2012) ruled that withholding existing funds to force state compliance is unconstitutional.
Statutory Misinterpretation: 2 U.S.C. § 7 and 3 U.S.C. § 1, set a voting day, not a national ballot receipt deadline.
Federalism Ignored: Comparisons to countries like India or Denmark ignore the U.S. model of decentralized election administration (NCSL, 2025).
Efforts to impose sweeping national standards on voting and elections through executive action not only sidestep Congress, they also disregard the Constitution’s carefully constructed framework of shared authority. As constitutional scholar Alan Tarr explains (Tarr, A., 2021), the Constitution gives Congress—not the President—the power to regulate federal elections.¹ Voting and elections are areas where the states and Congress share responsibility, and any changes to national election rules must come through legislation—not unilateral executive orders. Tarr’s work provides a deeply informed look at this balance, showing how it was designed to prevent exactly this kind of executive overreach.
A Disinformation-Driven Directive The EO is built on false claims of widespread noncitizen voting, misuses statutory authority, and directs independent agencies like the EAC to take actions they are not legally permitted to perform (Brennan Center, 2024; NPR, 2024). It closely mirrors the SAVE Act, a proposed law that similarly seeks to restrict voter access.
The Brennan Center (2025) has denounced the executive order as “a clear violation of federal law and the Constitution.” The order unlawfully “aims to illegally overhaul and take control of major parts of the nation’s election systems,” directing an independent agency to alter federal voter registration forms and threatening to withhold “funds allocated by Congress” from states that do not comply. It also imposes a “show-your-papers requirement” that could “outright prevent huge numbers of eligible American citizens from voting.” Voting rights groups, including the Brennan Center, have filed legal challenges to stop its implementation.
Importantly, the executive order closely mirrors provisions in the proposed SAVE Act, which would impose similar voter registration barriers through legislation. As the Brennan Center notes, “Now the president is trying to do an end run around Congress and the public by putting a version of the SAVE Act’s policies into place by fiat.” That framing reveals the order for what it is: not a good-faith administrative act, but a political maneuver to impose restrictive policies that may not survive the legislative process.
Conclusion This executive order is not a neutral administrative act—it is a political weapon crafted from distortion. If enacted, it would disenfranchise millions, undermine legal safeguards, and violate core constitutional principles.
The SAVE Act: A Legislative Echo of the Executive Order
Introduced in January 2025, the SAVE Act (H.R. 22) would require all voter registration applicants to provide documentary proof of citizenship, such as a passport or birth certificate, regardless of registration method. It would:
Apply to mail, in-person, DMV, and online registration
Mandate in-person documentation for mail registration
Authorize purging of voter rolls based on DHS and SSA databases
Impose penalties on election officials who assist undocumented registrants
Increase data-sharing between state and federal agencies
The SAVE Act’s Dangers: Disenfranchisement, Overreach, and Misinformation
Based on Disproven Premises: There is no evidence of widespread noncitizen voting (Weiser, 2025).
Violates Precedent: In Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council (570 U.S. 1, 2013), the Supreme Court ruled states cannot require documentary proof beyond the NVRA’s attestation.
Disenfranchises Millions: Over 21 million Americans lack the documents required. Impacted groups include married women, seniors, rural voters, and naturalized citizens (Brennan Center, 2025).
Administrative Chaos: The SAVE system is error-prone and not designed for voter verification. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, the SAVE database “was never designed to verify voter eligibility and contains data that is often outdated or incomplete—particularly for naturalized citizens.” (Brennan Center, 2024)
Whether imposed by statute or executive action, the result is the same: the erosion of voter access based on a manufactured threat.
A Final Word: Truth Is the Foundation of Democracy
The threats outlined here—executive overreach, voter suppression cloaked as reform, and legislation built on disinformation—demand more than awareness. They require action.
We, the people, have a responsibility to uphold the integrity of our democracy. That means rejecting false narratives, defending constitutional boundaries, and ensuring that no citizen is denied the right to vote based on fear or political expediency.
🗳️ What You Can Do:
Share this piece widely. Help others understand the truth about our election system and what's at stake.
Contact your elected officials. Urge them to defend constitutional principles and oppose laws or executive orders that suppress voter participation.
Take action today. ✍️ Use this customizable action letter at Engage For Democracy to send a message to your members of Congress.
Demand truth-based policy and transparency. Misinformation should never shape law. Ask your representatives to stand for facts, fairness, and voter access.
Our democracy depends not just on laws and courts—but on our collective commitment to facts, fairness, and freedom.
Let us rise to meet this moment.
Full Citations
AP News. Trump’s drumbeat of lies about the 2020 election keeps getting louder. Here are the facts. August 27, 2023. https://apnews.com/article/trump-2020-election-lies-debunked-4fc26546b07962fdbf9d66e739fbb50d
President Trump's claims of election interference are false. November 30, 2020. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/election-results-security-chris-krebs-60-minutes-2020-11-29/
Engage For Democracy. The 2020 Election Was Not Stolen—Here’s What the Evidence Shows. March 7, 2025. https://engagefordemocracy.substack.com/p/the-2020-election-was-not-stolenheres
PNAS, Clayton, K., et al. Elite rhetoric can undermine democratic norms. June 2, 2021. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2024125118
PNAS, Green, J., et al. Online engagement with 2020 election misinformation and turnout in the 2021 Georgia runoff election. August 16, 2022. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2115900119
Constitutional Law Reporter. Article 1, Section 4. Accessed April 1, 2025. https://constitutionallawreporter.com/article-01-section-04/#:~:text=Additionally%2C%20the%20last%20piece%20of,at%20least%2C%20on%20January%203rd.
Government Accounting Office (GAO). Elections and Campaign Finance. Accessed April 2, 2025. https://www.gao.gov/elections-and-campaign-finance
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). Election Administration at State and Local Levels. Updated January 29, 2025. https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/election-administration-at-state-and-local-levels
Voting Rights Act of 1965, Public Law 89-110, as amended 110-258.
National Voter Registration Act of 1993. Public Law 103-31.
Help America Vote Act of 2002. Public Law 107-252.
U.S. Constitution, Article 1 Section 4 (The Election Clause).
ACLU. Voting Rights Groups Challenge Trump’s Recent Executive Order. April 1, 2025. https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/voting-rights-groups-challenge-trumps-recent-executive-order
National Constitution Center. Section 4 Elections: The Common Interpretation. Accessed April 2, 2025.
CATO Institute Presidents Can’t Overhaul Election Law by Decree. March 26, 2025. https://www.cato.org/blog/presidents-cant-overhaul-election-law-decree
ProPublica. Trump Claims “Illegal Alien” Voting Is Rampant. His Own Party Disagrees. November 4, 2024. https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-pennsylvania-rnc-training-video-undocumented-voting-election
PBS News. Fact-checking Trump’s false claims about voter fraud and ‘rigged’ elections. October 5, 2024. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/fact-checking-trumps-false-claims-about-voter-fraud-and-rigged-elections
NPR. How Republicans mainstreamed the baseless idea of noncitizen voting in 2024. October 18, 2024. https://www.npr.org/2024/10/16/nx-s1-5147790/noncitizen-voting-claims-trump
Fortune. 20-year election official debunks ‘dangerous myths’ about the U.S. electoral process. November 4, 2024. https://fortune.com/2024/11/04/20-year-election-official-debunks-dangerous-myths-us-electoral-process-politics/
PNAS. Eggers, Andrew, et al.. No evidence for systematic voter fraud: A guide to statistical claims about the 2020 election. November 2, 2021. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2103619118
Brookings Institute. How widespread is election fraud in the United States? Not very. October 28, 2024. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-widespread-is-election-fraud-in-the-united-states-not-very/
Brookings Institute. Noncitizen Voting Is Already Illegal — and Vanishingly Rare - Trump and Speaker Johnson mislead again about election. April 17, 2024. Integrity. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/noncitizen-voting-already-illegal-and-vanishingly-rare
Ibid.
Immigration Impact. Unpacking Myths About Noncitizen Voting — How Heritage Foundation’s Own Data Proves It’s Not a Problem. August 1, 2024. https://immigrationimpact.com/2024/08/01/myths-about-noncitizen-voting-heritage-foundation-data/
The Hill. April 28, 2020. Let's put the vote-by-mail 'fraud' myth to rest
Brennan Center. 7 Facts About Voting — and Myths Being Spread About Them. October 31, 2024. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/7-facts-about-voting-and-myths-being-spread-about-them
Danforth, J., et al. Princeton University. Lost, not stolen: The conservative case that Trump lost and Biden won the 2020 presidential election. July 2022. https://dataspace.princeton.edu/handle/88435/dsp01mp48sh009
NPR. Trump Fires Election Security Director Who Corrected Voter Fraud Disinformation. November 17, 2020. https://www.npr.org/2020/11/17/936003057/cisa-director-chris-krebs-fired-after-trying-to-correct-voter-fraud-disinformati
CBS News. 60 Minutes. Fired director of U.S. cyber agency Chris Krebs explains why President Trump's claims of election interference are false. November 30, 2020. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/election-results-security-chris-krebs-60-minutes-2020-11-29/
Wu, J., et al. Are Dead People Voting By Mail? Evidence From Washington State Administrative Records. October 27, 2020. https://stanforddpl.org/papers/wu_et_al_2020_dead_voting/wu_et_al_2020_dead_voting.pdf
Crawford, K. Stanford University. Dead people don’t vote: Study points to an ‘extremely rare’ fraud. October 28, 2020. https://siepr.stanford.edu/news/dead-people-dont-vote-study-points-extremely-rare-fraud
CBS. Ibid. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/election-results-security-chris-krebs-60-minutes-2020-11-29/
Brennan Center for Justice. Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth. January 31, 2017. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/debunking-voter-fraud-myth
League of Women Voters.What's So Bad About Voter ID Laws? May 23, 2023. https://www.lwv.org/blog/whats-so-bad-about-voter-id-laws
Hajnal, Zoltan L., Lajevardi, Nazita, and Nielson, Lindsay R.“Voter Identification Laws and the Suppression of Minority Votes.” The Journal of Politics, 79(2), 363–379. University of California, San Diego. https://pages.ucsd.edu/~zhajnal/page5/documents/voterIDhajnaletal.pdf
American Bar Association (ABA).Jessica Brock. Impact of Voter ID Laws. September 23, 2024. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/senior_lawyers/resources/voice-of-experience/2024-september/impact-of-voter-id-laws-on-older-adults/
New York Times. Judge in Landmark Case Disavows Support for Voter ID. October 15, 2013. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/16/us/politics/judge-in-landmark-case-disavows-support-for-voter-id.html
Executive Order. March 25, 2025. Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/preserving-and-protecting-the-integrity-of-american-elections/
U.S. Constitution, Article 1 Section 4 (The Election Clause).
NFIB v. Sebelius. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/national_federation_of_independent_business_v._sebelius_(2012)
U.S. Constitution. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 (the Spending Clause). https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C1-2-1/ALDE_00013356/
2 U.S. Code § 7 - Time of election. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/2/7
3 U.S. Code § 1 - Time of appointing electors. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/1
U.S. Supreme Court. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, ET AL. v. WISCONSIN STATE LEGISLATURE, ET AL. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/revised%2020a66w_bqm2.pdf
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). Election Administration at State and Local Levels. Updated January 29, 2025. https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/election-administration-at-state-and-local-levels
Alan Tarr, Voting, Elections and US Federalism: The Federal Government Perspective, 50 Shades of Federalism (2021). https://50shadesoffederalism.co
Brennan Center. Noncitizen Voting Isn’t Affecting State or Federal Elections — Here’s Why. April 12, 2024. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/noncitizens-are-not-voting-federal-or-state-elections-heres-why
NPR. How Republicans mainstreamed the baseless idea of noncitizen voting in 2024. October 18, 2024. https://www.npr.org/2024/10/16/nx-s1-5147790/noncitizen-voting-claims-trump
Brennan Center. The President’s Executive Order on Elections, Explained. April 1, 2025. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/presidents-executive-order-elections-explained
m/case-studies/voting-elections-and-us-federalism-the-federal-government-perspective/
H.R. 22 SAVE Act, 119th Congress (2025-2026).
Brennan Center. The SAVE Act Would Hurt Americans Who Actively Participate in Elections. February 20, 2025. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/save-act-would-hurt-americans-who-actively-participate-elections
Weiser and Garber. The SAVE Act Would Undermine Voter Registration for all Americans. February 10, 2025. https://electionlawblog.org/?p=148570
Supreme Court. Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona (570 U.S. 1, 2013)
Brennan Center. Ibid.
Brennan Center. Ibid.