Slotkin Grills Nominees: “Keep Military Out of Midterms”
Senator Asks Pentagon to Promise: No Troops at Polling Places This November
What Happened?
Imagine you’re playing a game, and you want to make sure nobody changes the rules or scares players while they’re taking their turn. That’s kind of what Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin is doing—but for real elections.
On Tuesday, Senator Slotkin sent letters to two very important people:
- Pete Hegseth – The Secretary of Defense (the boss of the military)
- General Dan Caine – The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (the top military advisor)
She asked them to put it in writing: "The Department of Defense will not send Federal troops to the polls or to seize election materials of any kind."
The Pentagon replied they’ll answer her directly, like they do for all Congress members. The Joint Chiefs haven’t commented yet.
Why Is Senator Slotkin Worried?
Senator Slotkin says former President Trump has been "laying the groundwork" to claim the midterms were stolen if his party loses. She points to several things that make her concerned:
- After the 2020 election: Trump thought about using the military to seize voting machines
- National Guard deployments: Sent to cities against the wishes of Democratic mayors
- 2025 immigration crackdown: Active-duty Marines were sent to Los Angeles
- Pattern of behavior: Using military force in domestic situations more than usual
Think of it like this: If a referee in a game suddenly brings in bodyguards to stand next to the scoreboard, players might wonder: Are they protecting the score… or changing it?
The "Protect Our Polls Act" – A New Rulebook
In June, Senator Slotkin introduced a bill called the Protect Our Polls Act. Here’s what it would do:
- Restrict military personnel and federal agents at polling locations
- Require Congress to pass a special approval (called a Joint Resolution of Approval) before any president could send troops to polling places
- Add an extra layer of checks and balances—like needing a parent’s signature for a school field trip, but for democracy
What the Law Already Says
You might wonder: Isn’t this already illegal? Yes!
Federal law says armed federal forces cannot go to election locations unless it’s "necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States."
Translation: Unless a foreign army is invading a polling place, the military stays away.
If any military help is needed, it would be the National Guard—and they work for the state governor, not the president.
What Happened Before? (The 2020 Flashback)
This isn’t the first time Senator Slotkin has asked. Back in 2020, when she was a Congresswoman, she wrote to General Mark Milley (then the top military officer).
General Milley wrote back:
"I believe deeply in the principle of an apolitical U.S. military. In the event of a dispute over some aspect of the elections, by law U.S. courts and the U.S. Congress are required to resolve any disputes, not the U.S. military."
In kid terms: "My job is to defend the country, not decide who won the election. That’s for judges and Congress."
Recent Events Adding to Concerns
DOJ Election Monitors in Michigan (August 2026)
The Department of Justice sent election monitors to three Michigan cities during the August primary:
- East Lansing
- Detroit
- Lansing
This is normal—the DOJ often sends observers to make sure voting rights are protected. But combined with everything else, it raised eyebrows.
April Congressional Hearing
Senator Slotkin asked Secretary Hegseth directly: "Would you follow an order to seize ballots?"
Hegseth’s answer: Called it a "gotcha hypothetical" but said: "I’ve never been ordered to do anything illegal, and I won’t."
White House Response
Susie Wiles (White House Chief of Staff) told Vanity Fair last year:
"I say it is categorically false, will not happen. It’s just wrongheaded."
Important Points to Remember
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- Senator Slotkin wants a written promise—no federal troops at polling places
- Federal law already bans this—except for repelling armed enemies
- The Protect Our Polls Act would make it even harder by requiring Congress to approve
- Past behavior (2020 machine seizure talk, National Guard deployments, Marines in LA) fuels concern
- Military leaders (Milley, Hegseth) say they won’t do illegal things
- White House says it "categorically" won’t happen
Summary
Senator Elissa Slotkin is asking the Pentagon to put in writing that they won’t send federal troops to polling places during the November midterms. She’s worried because of past actions by former President Trump—like considering seizing voting machines in 2020 and deploying Marines domestically in 2025.
The law already says the military can’t be at polling places unless there’s an armed invasion. But Slotkin’s Protect Our Polls Act would add a Congressional approval requirement as an extra safeguard.
Top military officials (past and present) say the military stays out of elections. The White House calls the concerns "wrongheaded." But Slotkin wants zero ambiguity—a clear, written promise before voters head to the polls.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Can the President legally send troops to polling places?
A: Almost never. Federal law prohibits armed federal forces at election sites unless it’s to "repel armed enemies of the United States"—meaning a foreign invasion. The National Guard can be used, but only under state (governor) control, not federal orders.
Q: What is the Protect Our Polls Act?
A: A bill introduced by Senator Slotkin that would require Congress to pass a special resolution (Joint Resolution of Approval) before any president could deploy military personnel or federal agents to polling locations. It adds a democratic check on executive power.
Q: Has the military ever been used at polling places before?
A: Not in modern times for domestic elections. In 2020, General Mark Milley explicitly wrote that the military has no role in resolving election disputes—that’s for courts and Congress. The military’s job is to stay apolitical (neutral).
Q: Why is Senator Slotkin asking for a written promise if the law already exists?
A: Laws can be interpreted differently or ignored. A written commitment from the current Defense Secretary and Joint Chiefs Chair creates accountability and a clear record. It also puts public pressure on officials to honor the norm.
Q: What happens if the Pentagon refuses to give this written assurance?
A: It wouldn’t change the law—but it would signal that the current leadership won’t explicitly rule out something the law already forbids. That silence could be used politically to raise more alarms. Slotkin’s bill is the legislative backup plan.
Stay informed. Stay calm. And remember: in America, voters decide elections—not generals.