Podcast Summary: "Is The 2026 Election Already in Danger?"

The New Yorker Radio Hour — September 19, 2025
Host: David Remnick | Guest: Mark Elias (Democratic Election Lawyer)

Overview

This episode grapples with unprecedented threats to the integrity of American elections—particularly the 2026 midterms. Host David Remnick interviews Mark Elias, a leading Democratic election lawyer, about the political and legal maneuvers by the Trump administration that could undermine free and fair elections, ongoing political violence, and the evolution of gerrymandering. The discussion is candid, urgent, and at times deeply sobering about the future of American democracy.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Rising Political Violence and its Effects

• Opening Context: The interview occurs in the wake of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, adding urgency to the conversation.
• Elias's Assessment: The murder is described as a personal and civic tragedy that further normalizes violence in political life.
• Quote:

  "It is a tragedy for free speech and a tragedy for people who want to engage in public Dialogue, whether you agree with them or disagree with them... I fear that we are not at the end of this, that the fever won't break."
  — Mark Elias, [02:50]

2. Fear for Basic Electoral Process in 2026

• Remnick notes: Many Americans fear that the 2026 midterms might not occur normally, or at all.
• Elias responds: Midterms will happen, but not necessarily freely or fairly. He warns against complacency about democratic norms.
• Quote:

  "Dictators love elections. I mean, Vladimir Putin loves him an election. Now, they may not be a free and fair election, but they will be an election... What Donald Trump wants to do is try to rig the outcome of this election."
  — Mark Elias, [04:16]

3. Assaults on Mail-in Voting

• Trump Administration: Pushing to severely restrict or ban mail-in voting; also targeting certain voting machines.
• Elias's Framing: The opposition is purely partisan as mail-in voting trends Democratic.
• Quote:

  "Donald Trump's argument against mail in voting is that more Democrats vote by mail than Republicans. There is no other basis for it."
  — Mark Elias, [05:41]

4. Department of Justice Demanding Voter Data

• New Development: The DOJ has demanded detailed voter roll information from 34+ states—raising concerns over privacy and federal overreach.
• Legal Basis: States, not the federal executive, have authority over election conduct according to the Constitution.
• Potential Motives (Elias):
  • Misusing data for unrelated federal purposes (e.g., immigration)
  • Seeding disinformation about supposed illegal voting
  • Using data to contest results after the fact
• Quote:

  "I'm pretty sure they're not doing it to help the American people vote... They're going to use that information to spread wildly inaccurate disinformation and misinformation."
  — Mark Elias, [09:55]

5. Manufactured Threats of "Illegal Voting"

• Remnick asks: Is there real evidence of non-citizen voting?
• Elias reply: Virtually none; any rare cases are due to mistakes, not fraud. The issue is a pretext for mass disenfranchisement.
• Quote:

  "This is entirely not a problem. This is entirely a made up problem by Donald Trump and the Republicans to have an excuse to disenfranchise millions of Americans."
  — Mark Elias, [12:56]

6. Hardball Executive Orders & State Pushback

• Details:
  • Threats of national photo ID requirements, banning mail-in voting, decertifying certain voting equipment.
  • Use of executive orders to intimidate or coerce states via funding threats.
• Legal Weight: Executive orders cannot override Congressional or state authority over elections.
• Quote:

  "An executive order doesn't bind Congress... It is simply the boss... like getting a memo from your boss saying the policy of this company is X."
  — Mark Elias, [16:17]

7. Escalating Gerrymandering ("Re-gerrymandering")

• Texas: Now 're-gerrymandering'—not just redrawing lines post-census but continually re-tweaking them for partisan advantage.
• National Arms Race: Both red and blue states are engaging in aggressive line-drawing, aided by AI and increasingly sophisticated analytics.
• Elias’s Stance: Supports Democrats doing the same in their states to force a political reckoning.
• Quote:

  "The only way we're going to get out of this mess... is if Republican members of Congress feel this personally."
  — Mark Elias, [24:57]

8. Outlook for 2026 and Guardrails Against Abuse

• Prediction:
  • If Republicans lose, mass denial and non-concession.
  • Possible attempts by the Trump administration to overturn results—citing fraud or asserting federal authority.
  • First lines of defense are the courts and state/local officials, but both have been weakened by turnover and intimidation.
• Courts:
  • In 2020, courts mostly stood firm.
  • Today, courts are more cautious—either picking battles or more open to Trump’s legal theories.
• Quote:

  "It was a resounding resistance to the attack on democracy... there does seem to be a feeling in the last few months that the courts want to pick at best... their battles and they don't want a confrontation with him over everything."
  — Mark Elias, [29:45]

9. Supreme Court Dynamics

• Remnick presses Elias on whether the Supreme Court can be trusted as a final guardrail.
• Elias’s view: Most election litigations don't reach the Supreme Court, and recent outcomes have sometimes favored democracy, but the overall climate is ‘ominous.’
• Quote:

  "When it comes to election litigation, the Supreme Court does not tend to get as involved... But certainly, as you say, if you read the tea leaves, they're quite ominous."
  — Mark Elias, [31:23]

10. The Steele Dossier and Personal Vulnerability

• Remnick asks: Does Elias’s link to hiring Fusion GPS for opposition research damage his credibility or make him vulnerable?
• Elias: No apologies; collected all information legally and appropriately; Trump’s animus is due more to being beaten in court.
• Quote:

  "I think that the animus that Donald Trump has towards me stems largely from election results... my legal team and I were beating him in court."
  — Mark Elias, [35:26]

11. Future of American Democracy

• How does it end?
  • Elias offers a notably sobering response: We don't know and even a "best case" is not a return to the past.
  • The stability of democracy now depends on whether Republicans choose to re-embrace democratic norms.
  • Lawyers and courts can only "buy time"; responsibility ultimately lies with political actors—especially Republicans.
• Quote:

  "The future of democracy does not rest in the hands of the Democratic Party... it unfortunately rests in the hands of Republicans and whether or not they are willing to come back to that table and be part of that equation."
  — Mark Elias, [39:20]

Notable Quotes / Memorable Moments

• "The fever won't break." — Mark Elias on ongoing political violence [02:50]
• "What Donald Trump wants to do is try to rig the outcome of this election." — Mark Elias [04:16]
• "It is the job of me and other lawyers and democracy advocates to make sure that does not come to pass. But I am quite worried that that will be the case." — Mark Elias on the risk of unfair elections [07:54]
• "This is entirely a made up problem by Donald Trump and the Republicans to have an excuse to disenfranchise millions of Americans." — Mark Elias [13:26]
• "If they are allowed to do this, then every state where there is a complete control of government by one party will simply redraw the maps every two years." — Mark Elias on 're-gerrymandering' [23:20]
• "We at best are buying time for democracy." — Mark Elias [39:40]
• "Whether we're going to have a future as a thriving, functioning liberal democracy unfortunately rests in the hands of Republicans." — Mark Elias [40:00]

Timestamps for Major Segments

• [00:30] - [02:50]: Introduction; Trump's history of alleging rigged elections; assassination of Charlie Kirk context
• [02:50] - [06:28]: Impact of political violence & fears for 2026 election
• [06:28] - [08:31]: Free and fair elections: Elias's concerns and definition
• [08:31] - [12:45]: DOJ pressure for voter data; potential methods and motives
• [12:45] - [15:04]: The myth of illegal voting and administrative leverage
• [15:04] - [17:27]: Executive orders—legal limits and their use as propaganda/pressure
• [21:39] - [27:19]: Gerrymandering arms race—Texas, California, and structural risks
• [27:19] - [31:23]: Guardrails: Courts, state officials, and their vulnerabilities
• [31:23] - [35:26]: Elias’s link to the Steele Dossier; credibility and partisan narratives
• [36:48] - [40:14]: How this era might end—nature of democratic process and precarious future

Tone & Language Reflection

The conversation retains the clarity, precision, and occasional wryness typical of The New Yorker. Mark Elias is direct, rigorously factual, and openly worried; Remnick is probing, precise, and maintains a calm yet urgent tone. Both avoid alarmism, but neither sugarcoat the scale of the risk.

Summary prepared for listeners seeking a detailed, accurate account of the episode’s major themes and critical moments, with key quotations and timestamps for easy navigation.