President Donald Trump terminated the remaining members of the Election Assistance Commission on July 9, leaving the independent federal agency without a single sitting commissioner months before the 2026 midterm elections. The White House cited the Supreme Court's recent Trump v. Slaughter ruling as legal authority for the move and pointed to the commission's failure to act on non-citizen voting as the reason.
Democratic commissioners Thomas Hicks and Benjamin Hovland were fired via email, effective immediately. Republican commissioner Christy McCormick was allowed to resign rather than face outright removal. A fourth Republican commissioner, Donald Palmer, had already departed voluntarily earlier this year.
The result: an agency responsible for certifying voting systems, distributing election grants to states, and maintaining national voter registration forms now has no governing board, and cannot take formal action until new members are nominated and confirmed by the Senate.
The White House grounded the firings in the Supreme Court's June 29 ruling in Trump v. Slaughter, which significantly expanded presidential authority to remove officials from independent federal agencies. The decision effectively restored a president's power to fire independent agency employees at will, a power that had been constrained by precedent for decades.
A White House statement provided to the Associated Press made the administration's position plain:
"The President, and head of the Executive Branch, reserves the right to remove individuals that may not be totally aligned with the important task of securing America's elections and ensuring every legal vote is counted. The Slaughter decision gives the President precedence to do so."
In an exclusive Oval Office interview with Breitbart News last month, Trump said the Slaughter ruling "more than made up" for a separate, disappointing Supreme Court decision upholding birthright citizenship. That interview, published July 1, signaled the president viewed the ruling as a broad mandate to reshape federal agencies he considered misaligned with his priorities.
The immediate trigger was the commission's handling, or lack thereof, of non-citizen voting concerns. The AP reported that the EAC had previously declined to update the national voter registration form to require citizenship documentation, a step Trump demanded in a March 2025 executive order.
That refusal set the commission on a collision course with the White House. The administration's view, as expressed in its public statement, was that commissioners who would not act to verify voter eligibility were not "totally aligned" with election security.
The EAC's three core functions, distributing federal grants to states, overseeing the testing of voting systems, and maintaining voter registration forms, all now sit in limbo. Newsmax reported that without commissioners, the agency cannot take formal action on any of those responsibilities until the Senate confirms replacements.
For an agency whose entire purpose is to support election infrastructure, the timing matters. Midterm elections are approaching, and states rely on EAC grants and guidance to prepare.
Just The News obtained the language of the termination notice sent to the two Democratic commissioners:
"On behalf of President Donald J. Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position as Commissioner of the Election Assistance Commission is terminated, effective immediately. Thank you for your service."
No extended explanation. No transition period. The contrast with McCormick's treatment was notable, the Republican commissioner was permitted to resign on her own terms rather than receive the same curt email.
Trump's earlier removal of officials across multiple agencies has followed a similar pattern since the Slaughter ruling gave him clearer legal footing. The EAC shakeup fits a broader effort to bring independent commissions and boards into alignment with the president's policy agenda.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer wasted no time framing the move as an assault on democratic norms. The Washington Examiner reported his response:
"Firing every remaining member of the bipartisan Election Assistance Commission months before the midterms is a brazen attempt to seize control of our elections before a single vote is cast."
Senator Alex Padilla and Representative Joe Morelle issued a joint statement claiming Trump was "trying to dismantle yet another independent guardrail of our democracy designed to keep elections fair and secure." Michael Waldman of the Brennan Center for Justice called the action "deeply concerning in light of President Trump's relentless efforts to try to interfere in elections."
Even former Georgia Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan, a Republican, offered criticism. "Donald Trump wants to eliminate oversight of his administration's oversight, and that's what this is about," Duncan said.
But the Democratic objections run into an awkward fact. The commission had an opportunity to address non-citizen voting, a concern shared by large majorities of American voters, and chose not to act. If the EAC had moved to update voter registration forms to require proof of citizenship when the president asked in March 2025, the confrontation that followed might never have happened.
Schumer's history of clashing with the White House over election policy makes his outrage here unsurprising but not especially persuasive. The question is not whether the EAC should exist, it should, but whether its commissioners should be able to stonewall a lawful executive order and face no consequences.
The EAC now operates in a holding pattern. It has staff but no commissioners, which means no quorum and no formal decision-making authority. States expecting grant money, voting-system certifications, or updated guidance will have to wait.
The White House has not announced nominees to fill the vacant seats. The Senate confirmation process, even under favorable conditions, takes time, and whether the administration prioritizes speed here will say a great deal about its intentions.
Critics argue that leaving the EAC leaderless ahead of the midterms creates unnecessary risk. Supporters counter that an agency that refused to act on voter eligibility verification was already failing its mission. Both sides have a point, but only one side had the legal authority to break the stalemate, and the Supreme Court just confirmed it.
The Slaughter decision has given this president a tool that future presidents of both parties will inherit. How Trump uses it in the coming months, whether he moves quickly to install new commissioners who will update registration forms, or lets the vacancy linger, will determine whether this was a serious policy intervention or a political gesture.
The broader fight over accountability for federal officials who resist presidential direction is far from over. The EAC is a small agency, but the principle at stake is large: when an independent commission defies a lawful order, who answers for it?
Non-citizen voting is either a problem worth solving or it isn't. If it is, then a federal commission that maintains the national voter registration form and refuses to add a citizenship verification requirement is part of the problem. If it isn't, then Democrats should say so plainly, and explain to voters why requiring proof of citizenship to vote is unreasonable when proof of identity is required to board a plane, buy a beer, or pick up a prescription.
The EAC's defenders want to talk about process. The White House wants to talk about results. Voters, as usual, are stuck in the middle, asked to trust a system that won't take the most basic step to prove it deserves that trust.
An agency that won't do its job doesn't become sacred just because an election is coming. It becomes more urgently in need of new leadership.
