Trump Removes Remaining Members of the Election Assistance Commission
Indicators: Electoral integrity & acceptance of results
TL;DR
On July 9, 2026, President Trump removed the remaining members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. According to Votebeat, all three sitting commissioners were removed, leaving the federal election-administration body without any members months before the midterm elections.
What happened
On July 9, 2026, President Trump removed the remaining members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. NPR reported that he "relieved the remaining members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission," described the body as "bipartisan," and noted the action came "with just months until the midterms" and was "condemned by Democrats and voting rights advocates" (NPR). The Hill characterized the action as firing "the remaining Democratic members of the Election Assistance Commission on Thursday" and referred to the body as an "independent election board" (The Hill, The Hill).
Votebeat reported that Trump "fired all three sitting EAC members (Thomas Hicks, Benjamin Hovland, and Christy McCormick), leaving the federal election oversight agency without any commissioners," and that the commission is now "vacant and non-functional following the firing of its members" (Votebeat). The accounts differ on whether the removals targeted "the remaining Democratic members" (The Hill) or all sitting commissioners (Votebeat); the payload available to this entry does not resolve that discrepancy.
Democratic strategist David Axelrod wrote on social media that "all the signals are flashing red, the latest being [the President's] summary dismissal of the remaining Federal Election Assistance Commission members" (The Hill).
The record so far
The accumulated record on the elections indicator now contains three executive-branch actions touching federal election administration. On March 25, 2025, the President signed an executive order directing changes to federal election administration, including documentary proof of citizenship and a requirement that mail ballots be received by Election Day; the order, as reported, "asserted authority over areas of election administration the Constitution assigns primarily to states and Congress," and several provisions faced immediate legal challenges (White House / reported). On March 31, 2026, a further order directed the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration to compile an approved list of absentee voters eligible to receive mail ballots (Politico). The removal of the commission's members follows those two orders on the same indicator rather than appearing as an isolated development; this is the continuation of an existing line in the record, not a new thread.
On the co-moving check: the only indicator with a standing-reading change in the last 90 days is toleration of political violence (pattern), tied to the January 6 clemency grants: a distinct matter that does not bear on election administration. No election-adjacent indicator has moved, and the elections indicator's standing reading remains precedented, reflecting that no confirmed manipulation of election administration is documented in the current record.
Metric fit
| Indicator | Criterion | Direction |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral integrity & acceptance of results Tier 1 | “manipulating election administration, maps, or eligibility rules to entrench incumbents” | Raises |
| Electoral integrity & acceptance of results Tier 1 | “the 2024 election proceeded without documented systemic malfeasance” | Lowers |
Contested. The elections indicator raises on 'manipulating election administration, maps, or eligibility rules to entrench incumbents,' and removing the entire sitting membership of the federal election-administration commission months before a national election implicates that condition.
Evidence for an authoritarian reading
- single report According to Votebeat, the removals left the federal election-oversight agency 'vacant and non-functional ... without any commissioners,' and NPR reported the action came 'with just months until the midterms': the completeness of the removal (the entire sitting membership at once) and its timing are what distinguish it from routine appointee turnover.
- court-verified FDR's 1933 removal of a single FTC commissioner (William Humphrey) over policy disagreement was the last comparably direct removal of a member of an independent, bipartisan, multi-member federal commission to reach the Supreme Court, where it was held unlawful in Humphrey's Executor (1935); the present action removed the commission's entire sitting membership at once, exceeding that baseline in scale.
Evidence against / good-faith explanations
- court-verified Presidential removal of executive-branch appointees is a recognized power, and on June 29, 2026 the Supreme Court, in Trump v. Slaughter, overruled Humphrey's Executor and upheld the President's removal of an FTC commissioner on unitary-executive grounds: removing the principal legal restraint on at-will removal of independent-commission members, a basis that did not exist in FDR's era.
- single report Removal of federal board and commission appointees for alignment with an administration's priorities has recent bipartisan precedent: in September 2021 the Biden White House ordered 18 Trump appointees off the West Point, Naval Academy, and Air Force Academy boards of visitors, and no litigation reversed the removals.
Reading
Precedent: Named precedent cited
The elections indicator raises on 'manipulating election administration, maps, or eligibility rules to entrench incumbents,' and removing the entire sitting membership of the federal election-administration commission months before a national election implicates that condition. It is scored contested rather than pattern because the payload establishes the removals and the resulting vacancy but not that they manipulate administration toward an electoral outcome rather than exercise personnel authority: the discriminator here is selectivity toward incumbents, which the record does not yet demonstrate, not legality, which after Trump v. Slaughter (June 29, 2026) is not itself in question. FDR's 1933 removal of FTC Commissioner Humphrey is the nearest prior-administration comparator for removing a member of an independent bipartisan federal commission; the present action exceeds it in scale while resting on firmer legal footing than FDR's did. The indicator's 'lowers' condition (that 'the 2024 election proceeded without documented systemic malfeasance') still holds, keeping the standing reading precedented.
What would change this reading
A documented instance of the commission's removal being used to change ballot-access or vote-counting rules to favor incumbents before the midterms would raise this reading; renomination and Senate confirmation of new commissioners, or the commission resuming ordinary operations, would hold it in place.
Sources
- President Trump cleans house at the bipartisan Election Assistance Commission, NPR Politics (2026-07-09)
- Axelrod: 'Signals are flashing red' over potential Trump election interference, The Hill (2026-07-10)
- Live updates: Iran reportedly plotted to target Trump; independent election board Dems fired, The Hill (2026-07-10)
- Trump fires Election Assistance Commission members Hicks, Hovland, McCormick, Votebeat (2026-07-09)
- Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections, White House (2025-03-25)
- Trump signs executive order limiting mail-in voting, Politico (2026-03-31)
- Humphrey's Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935), Cornell Legal Information Institute (1935-05-27)
- Court allows Trump to fire FTC commissioner and overturns major restraint on presidential power, SCOTUSblog (2026-06-29)
- Biden ousts 18 Trump military academy board appointees including Spicer, Conway, CBS News (2021-09-08)
Entities: Trump, Election Assistance Commission