For years, progressives have warned that authoritarianism in America probably would not arrive with tanks in the streets or an announcement that elections had been canceled. It would come through executive orders, agency regulations, government databases, threats of prosecution and a president relentlessly testing whether Congress, the courts or anyone else could still tell him no. Donald Trump’s attempt to seize control of mail voting through the United States Postal Service

Who runs elections in the United States? It sounds like a simple question. But judging by recent headlines—and some very loud voices online—there’s a lot of confusion. If your answer is “the President,” you’re not alone. But you’re also not correct. The truth is, the President has—and is supposed to have—very little direct control over elections. Yes, even Donald Trump. That’s not a political opinion. That’s how the system was designed. Fifteen hundred-thousandths of 1% . And

Everybody’s heard about the SAVE Act by now. It’s being talked about everywhere—on TV, online, and in political speeches—usually framed in the simplest possible terms: require proof of citizenship to vote. At first glance, that sounds reasonable. After all, only U.S. citizens should vote in federal elections. That’s not controversial. But here’s the problem: that’s already the law. The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act doesn’t create a new rule about who can vote. Ins