Internal federal guidance directs a DHS criminal voter fraud surge across nine states

What happened

The guidance says HSI is launching a coordinated criminal voter fraud surge initiative to pursue investigative leads, conduct field interviews, and support timely prosecutorial review. The nine states whose offices are expected to take investigative action are Washington, Wisconsin, Missouri, Georgia, California, Pennsylvania, Nevada, New York and Connecticut. The department has leaned for this investigative work on Homeland Security Investigations, an arm of Immigration and Customs Enforcement that typically tackles major crimes like human trafficking, drug smuggling and child exploitation. A separate memo directed HSI agents to coordinate with US Citizenship and Immigration Services to begin removal proceedings when a noncitizen is suspected of or linked to voter fraud. Experts say there is no evidence that widespread voter fraud has occurred in recent elections.

The surge was under way by 3 September. HSI Kansas City posted a picture of agents on a doorstep with the statement that it "is committed to protecting the integrity of our elections by investigating voter election fraud and holding violators accountable", and HSI San Francisco publicised working with the FBI and U.S. Marshals on a voter fraud operation. Missouri is one of the states set to receive an influx of agents, and sources say at least nine states could. On the standard the department's own government holds itself to, the Justice Department manual warns that investigating during the voting period "runs the risk of chilling legitimate voting and campaign activities and of interjecting the investigation itself into ongoing campaigns and the adjudication of any ensuing election contest", and experts say there is no evidence that widespread voter fraud has occurred in recent elections.

Why it matters

The instrument here is criminal investigative attention, and the mechanism runs through who receives it rather than who is convicted. Field interviews conducted by an agency whose ordinary business is human trafficking and drug smuggling, aimed at people suspected of registering or voting when they should not have, carry a consequence the investigation does not need to prove: a naturalised citizen approached for a field interview about their voting history learns that voting attracted the attention of immigration enforcement. Tying that to removal proceedings through a second memo places the cost of an error on the person investigated, and the timetable runs through the period in which this year's elections are conducted.