HR-9306-119
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Sponsored by Jill Tokuda (D-HI)
What it does
This bill would prohibit employees of federal executive agencies from participating in, or directing others to participate in, the administration of federal elections — unless they are specifically authorized to do so under existing federal laws (the Help America Vote Act, the National Voter Registration Act, the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, or Title 10 military provisions). It would allow state attorneys general to sue in federal court for injunctive relief if a violation occurs. The bill explicitly carves out cybersecurity assistance to protect voting systems and excludes the U.S. Postal Service from its scope.
Who benefits
State and local election officials who would have a clearer legal boundary against unsolicited federal involvement in their election processes. State attorneys general who would gain a new enforcement tool. Voters and candidates who prefer election administration remain under state and local control. Political parties and candidates who believe federal executive branch involvement in elections creates conflicts of interest or opportunities for partisan interference.
Who is hurt
Federal agencies that currently provide voluntary election-related assistance beyond what is explicitly authorized by the named statutes — such as the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) beyond its cybersecurity carve-out, or agencies that conduct voter registration drives for federal employees. Federal employees who engage in election-related outreach or assistance programs in good faith may face legal uncertainty. Voters who benefit from federal agency voter registration assistance programs not explicitly covered by the named statutes. Advocacy groups that have supported expanded federal agency participation in voter registration and election assistance.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the Constitution assigns election administration to the states, and that recent executive branch directives — such as Executive Order 14019 (2021), which directed federal agencies to promote voter registration and participation — represent an unprecedented expansion of federal executive power into a domain reserved for states and localities. They contend that allowing unelected federal agency employees to participate in election administration without clear statutory authorization creates serious risks of partisan manipulation and undermines public confidence in election integrity, and that this bill restores the proper constitutional boundary by limiting federal involvement to what Congress has explicitly authorized.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that federal agencies have long played a legitimate and beneficial role in expanding voter access — particularly through the National Voter Registration Act, which already requires many agencies to offer voter registration — and that this bill's broad prohibition could chill lawful activity by creating legal uncertainty for agencies operating near the line. They contend that the bill's enforcement mechanism, which empowers state attorneys general to sue in federal court, could be weaponized to block federal assistance that benefits underserved communities, and that the carve-outs for named statutes are too narrow to cover all legitimate federal election-support activities currently authorized by law.
Constitutional context
The Elections Clause (Art. I, §4) gives Congress broad authority to regulate federal elections, and the Tenth Amendment reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states — creating ongoing tension over how much the executive branch may act in election administration absent explicit congressional authorization. The major questions doctrine from West Virginia v. EPA (2022) is relevant here: if executive agencies have been claiming broad authority to participate in election administration based on general statutory language, courts applying that doctrine would now require clear congressional authorization for such significant actions.
Checks and balances
Congress would restrict executive agency authority over election administration; state attorneys general gain a new enforcement mechanism via federal civil suits; federal courts serve as the check on both executive overreach and potential misuse of the state enforcement power.
Historical precedent
Executive Order 14019 (2021) directed federal agencies to expand voter registration and participation efforts, prompting legal and political challenges over whether the executive branch has inherent authority to direct agencies into election administration absent specific congressional authorization.