Election Overturn Attempts & Voting Fights
From the 2020 post-election period through second-term passport and citizenship disputes, documented in courts, reports, and public statements.
Last updated
What happened after the November 2020 election?
Donald Trump refused to concede, alleging widespread fraud without evidence upheld in court. His campaign and allies filed dozens of lawsuits; nearly all failed or were withdrawn. Public pressure targeted state officials (Georgia, Arizona, Michigan) and Vice President Mike Pence to reject or delay certification on January 6, 2021.
Documented steps included: the December 19, 2020 post calling for a January 6 protest ("Be there, will be wild!"); meetings with DOJ leadership to pursue fraud claims; the Eastman memo plan to have Pence block certification; and contact with state legislators about alternate slates of electors. The House January 6 Committee and DOJ special counsel investigations documented this multi-track effort to keep Trump in office despite losing the electoral vote 306–232.
What were the legal consequences of the 2020–2021 campaign?
| Date / event | Outcome |
|---|---|
| Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol attack | Congress certified election after riot; multiple deaths and hundreds of prosecutions |
| Second impeachment (2021) | House charged incitement of insurrection; Senate acquitted after he left office |
| Fake elector schemes | Multiple state and federal indictments of participants (2023–2025) |
| DOJ special counsel (2022–2024) | Federal indictment on election-subversion counts; later narrowed after Supreme Court immunity ruling |
| Smith testimony (Dec. 17, 2025) | Testifying under oath to the House Judiciary Committee, former special counsel Jack Smith said his investigation "developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power." The case never went to trial; it was dismissed after Trump's 2024 election win. |
Sources: House Judiciary Committee, Smith deposition transcript · NBC News
What second-term fights involve passports, married women, and voting?
Passports & sex markers: On Jan. 20, 2025, Executive Order 14168 directed federal IDs, including passports, to reflect "biological sex at birth." Lower courts blocked enforcement for a time; on Nov. 6, 2025, the Supreme Court granted a stay allowing the State Department to enforce the policy while litigation continues (Trump v. Orr). Applicants who had used gender-identity markers or the "X" designation faced delays or reissued documents matching birth sex per State Department guidance.
Married women & name mismatches: Separate from the passport sex-marker case, proposed federal voting rules, including the SAVE America Act and Trump election executive orders requiring documentary proof of citizenship, would force millions of married women who changed surnames to produce extra name-change documentation to register or vote. PolitiFact and voting-rights groups documented the burden; the SAVE Act passed the House but stalled in the Senate as of early 2026.
Courts blocking voting EOs: U.S. District Judge Denise Casper permanently barred most of Trump's first election executive order, including proof-of-citizenship registration requirements, ruling it exceeded presidential authority under the separation of powers (PBS News, 2026). Other election-related orders faced injunctions in D.C. federal court.
Sources: SCOTUSblog, passport stay · PBS, citizenship order blocked
What is the Justice Department's lawsuit over Alaska's Senate race?
The filing: On Thursday, Oct. 22, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice sued the State of Alaska. It asks a federal judge to bar election officials from certifying the U.S. Senate result if Republican incumbent Sen. Dan Sullivan loses, pending an investigation into whether votes cast for a second candidate, Daniel J. Sullivan, were meant for the senator (Votebeat; ABC News). Under the filing's theory, the result would be tainted if the incumbent would have won once those votes were counted for him under Alaska's ranked-choice system.
Background: Alaska election officials disqualified Daniel J. Sullivan from the ballot in June 2026, finding his candidacy was not made in good faith. A state judge ruled he was eligible and the Alaska Supreme Court upheld that ruling, so he remains one of four candidates, alongside the incumbent and Democrat Mary Peltola. A DOJ spokesperson called the candidacy "frivolous" and said the department is acting under the National Voter Registration Act. President Trump said on Oct. 23 that he told the department to bring the suit.
Reactions: Peltola's campaign called the suit a political threat to overturn an election. Sen. Sullivan's spokesperson said the campaign would let the complaint run its course. Attorney General Todd Blanche said the department does not intend to improperly interfere with elections. Legal scholars quoted by Votebeat called the suit unprecedented and unlikely to succeed. The Alaska Secretary of State's office had not commented in the reports reviewed.
Update, Nov. 1: U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason dismissed the suit on Sunday, Nov. 1, 2026. She called the requested relief "infeasible" because many voters had already cast ballots, said the federal government offered no workable plan to separate ballots for Daniel J. Sullivan while preserving voter secrecy, and said the case ran counter to the Constitution, which gives states authority over elections, citing the Purcell principle against late changes to election rules. The Justice Department said it would appeal.
Where the race stands: As of Nov. 5, 2026, the Senate race was uncalled, with Peltola ahead of Sullivan by 637 votes per the AP and ranked-choice results due Nov. 18. See the Senate results page.
Sources: Votebeat, Oct. 23, 2026 · ABC News, Oct. 23, 2026 · Associated Press, Nov. 1, 2026 · Al Jazeera, Nov. 5, 2026. The Nov. 1 ruling above dismissed the case; the Justice Department has said it will appeal.
TLDR: election and documentation disputes
The 2020–Jan. 2021 period combined litigation, public pressure, and Jan. 6 to challenge a certified loss. Second-term disputes extend to identity documents, voting access, an October 2026 Justice Department suit over certifying Alaska's Senate race, and withholding federal grants from states that voted for Harris. For how litigation delayed criminal accountability and how civil verdicts like Carroll's still took years to collect, see Courts, delay & accountability.