One year into his second term, we have seen the same game plan time and again from President Trump’s administration.

It goes like this: take unprecedented, legally questionable action, create chaos and fear, absorb a judicial rebuke, then claim victory to an extreme-right audience while inflicting lasting damage on democratic institutions and norms.

We have seen it in the sweeping immigration crackdowns announced with maximal force and minimal preparation, only to be slowed or blocked by the courts after communities were already thrown into panic. We have seen it again in punitive executive actions, targeting cities, institutions, and even private actors, that were ultimately enjoined but not before their intended message of intimidation was delivered.

The goal is not to achieve a durable policy outcome. The aim is instead to exert power in ways that dispirit and disorient those who stand in the way of Trump’s consolidation of power. This very playbook was deployed recently on the streets of Minneapolis to deadly effect.

The shocking deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti also foreshadow another danger to the rule of law: efforts to interfere with free and fair elections in this country.

A template for disrupting voting

The significance of what happened in Minneapolis and Chicago prior extends well beyond immigration enforcement. Federal shows of force do not need to be repeated everywhere to have their intended effect. They only need to be visible enough (and unpredictable enough) to signal that no space, including the space around elections, is beyond reach.

Indeed, the Trump administration’s violent immigration crackdown in cities across the country could well be the template for future efforts to disrupt and depress voting in Black, Brown, and heavily Democratic communities in this fall’s midterms, in 2028, and beyond.

Nationalizing elections, expanding federal power

President Trump’s insistence that he won the 2020 election, despite repeated court rulings rejecting his claims of widespread fraud, has resulted in yet another call to action from the President that Republicans ‘nationalize’ upcoming elections.

The FBI’s unprecedented search and seizure within a Fulton County, Georgia, election facility, carried out with the participation of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard at President Trump’s request, signals the effort may already be afoot.

Courts can’t undo fear at the polls

Across 2025, hundreds of lawsuits challenged Trump’s executive actions, turning federal courts into frequent roadblocks that paused, narrowed, or reversed controversial policies. From anti-DEI orders that were enjoined in federal court to a punitive order against a major law firm that a judge ruled unconstitutional, the pattern is consistent: aggressive, chaotic moves followed by judicial intervention.

But in the context of an effort to sow fear and erect barriers to the polls during an election, after-thefact judicial intervention would be terrifyingly inadequate. A show of force by any combination of federal law enforcement, the National Guard, or active-duty military would have an immediate and chilling effect on turnout. And on the election itself. No court action could provide meaningful relief in that scenario. No injunction, issued days or weeks later, could cure such a breach of democratic norms.

Courts can stop a policy. They cannot rerun a subverted moment of democratic participation. That’s why intimidation near the polls is uniquely dangerous: once turnout is depressed, you can’t restore votes that were never cast, and you can’t ‘injunction’ your way back to a legitimate outcome.

In modern swing states, elections aren’t decided by millions of votes; they’re decided by 10,000 here, 12,000 there. In 2020, Arizona was decided by 10,457 votes and Georgia by 11,779.

With majorities in Congress razor-thin and presidential elections hinging on increasingly tight results in a handful of swing states, it would take very little fear, very little disruption, to change the course of American democracy.

What voters can do now

Which is why this November, we cannot let political stunts and threats of violence keep us from casting our votes. The most effective defense against voter suppression is preparation. Voters who check their registration, confirm their polling location, and understand local rules before Election Day are far less likely to be deterred by confusion or disruption.

Where possible, vote early or by mail. Plan to vote with your friends, family, and neighbors, because voter suppression thrives when people are isolated. Know your rights: if you are in line when polls close, stay in line. If there is a problem, ask for a provisional ballot and report intimidation.

Taken together, these steps make suppression harder to execute and fear easier to defeat.

The stakes are high, but ultimately, it’s on us to show up to meet the moment.

Michael Bland is executive director of Black Men Vote, a national nonprofit committed to moving Black men from the political margins to the center of American democracy. Through civic education, community-based programming, and strategic voter engagement efforts, BMV builds political power and leadership among Black men nationwide.