The EAC Has No Commissioners. Now What?

Independent Times News
Jul 20
5 min read

Updated: Jul 23

Here's What Both Parties Are Saying

On July 9, President Trump removed the last remaining members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, firing Democratic commissioners Thomas Hicks and Benjamin Hovland by email and accepting the resignation of Republican Christy McCormick, as first reported by ProPublica. The fourth seat had been empty since April, when Republican Donald Palmer left for the Heritage Foundation. For the first time in its history, the bipartisan agency built to help states run elections has zero commissioners, four months before the midterms.

Before we get to what this means for you, here's what each party is saying.

https://youtu.be/mMS-CJiHZNM?si=bEeckarNfjw0j94A

Trump fires election commission members in latest attempt to control voting process | PBS Newshour

What Democrats Are Saying

Democratic reaction was swift and unified around one theme: this is a power grab over election infrastructure.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the removals "a brazen attempt to seize control of our elections" and pledged that Senate Democrats would fight the move at every step.

Sen. Alex Padilla of California and Rep. Joe Morelle of New York, the top Democrats on the Senate Rules and House Administration committees, which oversee elections, issued a joint statement accusing the president of dismantling an independent guardrail of democracy. They argued that purging commissioners months before the midterms is part of a deliberate effort to politicize election administration. At the same time, support for state and local election officials is being cut elsewhere, which is part of a deliberate effort to politicize election administration. They also faulted the Supreme Court's conservative majority for enabling the move by expanding presidential removal power.

Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia framed it as a cross-partisan concern, noting that Congress deliberately built the EAC as an independent, bipartisan body so states could count on neutral help administering secure elections.

Democratic state election officials echoed the alarm. Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar and others called the dismantling reckless and irresponsible, stressing that the EAC plays a critical support role for state and local offices. And Hovland, one of the fired commissioners originally nominated by Trump himself in his first term, told NBC News the damage will be cumulative rather than dramatic, describing it as a death-by-a-thousand-cuts problem: asking more of election workers while stripping away resources invites mistakes.

https://youtu.be/X2tMLU7GIQE?si=ZeQnqsGyCZYHaq_3

Jen Psaki breaks down the firing of EAC commissioners and Democrats' response | MS NOW

What Republicans Are Saying

The administration is making two distinct arguments: first, that the president has the legal power to fire these commissioners, and second, that doing so serves the goal of preventing election fraud.

A White House official said the president, as head of the executive branch, has the right to remove officials who are not fully aligned with the administration's mission of securing elections and ensuring every legal vote is counted. The official pointed directly to the Supreme Court's late-June decision in Trump v. Slaughter, which overturned decades of precedent and held that presidents may remove leaders of independent agencies. The White House also confirmed the commissioners "will be replaced". It said the administration has been working across agencies and with local partners to protect the midterms from fraud and abuse.

As of this publication, however, the White House has not named any nominees. Under HAVA, nominations traditionally come on recommendations from House and Senate leadership of both parties, and history suggests refilling the seats won't be fast: the EAC has been without a quorum before, and it regained stability only after the Senate confirmed new commissioners in 2019, following years of vacancy-driven paralysis.

Notably, the EAC had resisted a March 2025 executive order directing it to add a proof-of-citizenship requirement to the national voter registration form an order largely blocked by courts. Removing the commissioners lets the president nominate replacements who may be more receptive to that agenda. However, any nominee still needs Senate confirmation, and by law no more than two commissioners can come from the same party.

Congressional Republicans have so far been largely quiet on the firings themselves. Some in the party have argued for years that the EAC is redundant. House Republicans proposed eliminating it as far back as 2011, and the current House majority has pushed to cut its budget. Republican energy on elections is focused elsewhere: Speaker Mike Johnson is pressing to pass the SAVE America Act, which would impose nationwide proof-of-citizenship and photo ID requirements.

https://youtu.be/YUoocbncBp8?si=lHB0xkFTqeFexS8y

'I would not have done it': GOP Mike Lawler reacts to Trump firing election board Democrats | Meet The Press NOW

What Actually Changes and What Doesn't

What doesn't change: Your state and county still run your elections. They always have. The EAC never conducted elections; it supported the people who do. Career EAC staff retain limited delegated authority to keep routine functions going, disbursing grants Congress already approved and maintaining the national voter registration form.

What changes: Without a quorum of three commissioners, the agency cannot vote on anything: no new voting-system certification standards, no new official guidance, no new policy. That includes the federal testing and certification program for voting equipment, which many states require before machines can be purchased or used, and any commission-level action on new grants. Election officials lose their main federal clearinghouse for technical help, security best practices, and equipment certification updates during the run-up to a national election.

Worth noting for readers of every stripe: the paralysis cuts both ways. The same lack of quorum also stalls any attempt by the administration itself to use the EAC to alter the federal voter registration form or voting-system standards before the midterms. Until new commissioners are confirmed, neither critics nor allies can steer this agency anywhere.

What's unresolved: Election law scholar Rick Hasen notes it's an open legal question whether the Slaughter ruling even applies to agencies Congress deliberately structured with bipartisan balance, like the EAC. No lawsuit has been filed so far, and the dismissed commissioners have not indicated whether they will sue. Still, if Hicks or Hovland do challenge their removals, it would be the first direct court test of whether the president's expanded removal power reaches bipartisan election agencies, with implications far beyond the EAC.

Separately, Democracy Docket reports that any consequential action taken by career staff without commissioners behind it would likely draw immediate litigation of its own. And with Senate confirmation required, it's unclear whether any replacements will be seated before November.

The Bottom Line for Independent Voters

Strip away the partisan framing and three facts remain:

First, your November ballot will be administered by the same state and local officials as before; this does not cancel, move, or federalize any election.

Second, State election officials have lost their main source of federal help technical guidance, equipment certification, security advice right when preparation for November is at its busiest. The next commissioners, whenever they're confirmed, will decide how voting machines get certified and what guidance states receive for years to come.

Third, this is a test case: the first use of the president's newly expanded removal power against an agency Congress explicitly designed to be bipartisan and independent.

That last point is the one to watch regardless of which party you lean toward. If a president of either party can clear out a bipartisan election agency and restock it, the precedent applies to the next administration too. Watch three things this fall: who gets nominated, whether the Senate confirms them before November, and whether the courts decide the firings were legal in the first place.