A Record 1,000 Justice Department Monitors Head to the Polls Today. In Minnesota's Two Biggest Counties, They Have to Stay 100 Feet Back
The Justice Department says it is sending monitors to all 50 states for Tuesday's midterms, its largest effort ever. Hennepin and Ramsey counties turned down its request to put them inside polling places, Minnesota is sending its own observers to watch the federal teams, and a federal judge in Washington set rules for who can serve. Here's what monitors are allowed to do, what they aren't, and why each side sees them so differently.
By Claire Hollister, Politics and Policy
Published · 8 min read

The Overview
The facts, straight
What's happening today. The Justice Department says it is sending election monitors to polling places in all 50 states for Tuesday's midterms. "We will be in all 50 states, including Minnesota, doing the routine election monitoring the department has done for decades," the department told KSTP, which reported the plan as about 1,000 monitors nationwide, the department's largest effort ever. That's roughly triple the number sent in the last midterm, Reuters reported. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, who runs the department's Civil Rights Division, made the same claim herself:
Post: Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon (@AAGDhillon) on X, Oct. 23, 2026.
In the video she says the monitors will look for problems with "language access," "disability access" and "any voter intimidation," and that the department "may take legal action afterwards." A department spokesperson told Votebeat that the full list of places getting monitors would be released on Election Day.
Minnesota's answer. The department asked Hennepin County, home to Minneapolis, to let its staff inside polling places, as it had before the August primary. The county said no. "After consultation with our office, the Minnesota Secretary of State's Office, and others, Hennepin County denied the request," the Hennepin County Attorney's Office said Monday. It went on:
- "Monitors will not be permitted inside polling places but instead must remain outside a 100-foot boundary from the polling locations, in compliance with Minnesota law."
- "The monitors are expected to be DOJ staff in plainclothes and may attempt to interview voters as they leave the polling place. Participation in these interviews is entirely voluntary."
- "The Minnesota Attorney General's Office has stated plans to observe the DOJ monitoring teams."
"Both Hennepin and Ramsey County have declined the DOJ's request to allow these observers, as they can under the law," Secretary of State Steve Simon said at a briefing, FOX 9 reported. His office expects five to six two-person federal teams in Hennepin and four to five in Ramsey, all staying outside the line. Simon said his office and Attorney General Keith Ellison's will again send their own people to watch the federal teams. In August, Minnesota sent about 40 state employees, working in pairs, to follow the DOJ lawyers, according to Reuters.
Post: Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty (@HennepinAtty) on X, Nov. 2, 2026.
The law behind the 100-foot line. Minn. Stat. § 204C.06 says that, apart from election officials, people waiting to vote and exit pollsters, "an individual must not stand within 100 feet of the building in which a polling place is located." Inside, the law lists who may stay during voting hours: state, county and city election representatives, election judges, challengers and people voting or helping a voter. Federal monitors aren't on that list, which is why they need the county's permission.
Monitors vs. observers. These two words get mixed up, and the difference explains why counties can say no.
- Federal observers are a program written into the Voting Rights Act. Under 52 U.S.C. § 10305, the federal Office of Personnel Management assigns them, and they may "enter and attend at any place for holding an election." Since the Supreme Court's 2013 Shelby County ruling, the Justice Department says it sends them only where a federal court has ordered it (DOJ explainer).
- Election monitors, today's 1,000, are Justice Department staff the Civil Rights Division sends on its own, under the same page's description of its field monitoring. No statute gives them a right to walk into a polling place. A department spokesperson told Votebeat, "DOJ monitors are subject to state and local laws and rules pertaining to polling locations." Colorado, Indiana and Wyoming have also said monitors must keep a set distance from polling places, Votebeat reported.
A judge sets the ground rules. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton in Washington denied the NAACP's emergency request to keep staff from the Bureau of Prisons, the ATF and the DEA out of the program (NAACP v. Blanche, order). He did it because of what DOJ promised in court. He ordered the department to make sure monitors "are indeed administrative or clerical personnel and not law enforcement officials, will not be in uniform or display any other insignia indicating their affiliation with a federal agency, will not be armed with a firearm, and will not have the power to effectuate arrests." Monitors must also "not talk with any voter inside the polling place" and may "only talk to voters outside the polling place after the voter has cast his or her ballot." DOJ had to file a report by 7 a.m. Eastern today on how it confirmed none of the monitors are law enforcement officers. If the NAACP believes the rules are broken today, the judge said he "will take immediate action."
Maine, framed as allegations. In Maine, DOJ plans to send monitors to Lewiston, Portland and South Portland, the Bangor Daily News reported. Separately, U.S. Attorney Andrew Benson's office confirmed it is reviewing security video of early voting at Lewiston City Hall after The Maine Wire, a conservative outlet, accused interpreters of coaching Somali American voters and, in some clips, filling out ballots. Those are allegations. The office has said only that the footage is under review, and it won't say whether it is investigating. The BDN notes that federal law lets a voter who needs help choose an assistant, including an interpreter. Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows told WGME that monitors "may not interact with voters, handle ballots or equipment or disrupt voting in any way," and that her office will "monitor their activities."
What the Left Says
The progressive and Democratic case
Democratic officials and voting-rights groups say the program's size, its timing and who is serving in it are what make it different this year. They put it next to the administration's voter-roll lawsuits (most dismissed so far) and other federal moves aimed at election offices, including a federal judge's Oct. 30 order barring DOJ and Homeland Security from threatening election workers over flagged ballots.
The NAACP's Oct. 16 suit says the plan "stands to have a chilling effect on voters." "Generations of Black and brown voters faced down sheriffs and poll taxes to cast a ballot, so we know intimidation when we see it," said Carmen Daugherty of the Advancement Project. Judge Walton, while ruling against the NAACP, wrote that he found some of the group's evidence "concerning, and potentially indicative of a Section 11(b) violation." He quoted Dhillon saying in August that monitors would go "where there may be voter fraud issues that we've seen." And he wrote that his view "would differ" if DOJ actually sent officers with arrest powers.
Local officials are taking it calmly while preparing for problems. Simon told FOX 9, "Our aim all along has just been to make sure that the stated reason is the actual reason." Moriarty's office says it will prosecute anyone who crosses the line:
Post: Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty (@HennepinAtty) on X, Nov. 2, 2026.
"If anyone engages in unlawful activity, we will investigate and charge if appropriate," she says in the video.
Where Reality Likely Sits
Radio Purple's analysis
Shared ground. Both sides say voters should be able to vote without anyone interfering, and that problems should be documented and fixed. Democratic and Republican administrations have sent monitors since the Voting Rights Act of 1965, KSTP notes. Simon, a Democrat, says they've been used under multiple presidents, including Biden. He told MPR that in August, state observers were there "to make sure they were following the rules. And to be fair, they did" (MPR News).
What the record settles:
- Monitors can watch and take notes. That's it. Under DOJ's own sworn statement, now part of a court order, they can't interfere with voters or poll workers, can't talk to voters inside, can talk only to voters who have already voted, and must follow state law. They can't demand ID or ask whether you're a citizen, Anna Baldwin of the Campaign Legal Center told KSTP.
- Talking to them is optional. Hennepin County calls the exit interviews "entirely voluntary." Simon told MPR a voter can just say, "No, thanks, I'm on my way."
- Local officials decide who comes inside. Monitors aren't federal observers. In Minnesota, the county's no keeps them outside the 100-foot line, the same as any other member of the public.
- The size is new. The program isn't. About 1,000 monitors in all 50 states, by DOJ's account, with staff from other DOJ agencies filling out the ranks under court-ordered limits.
What it doesn't settle:
- What DOJ does with what it sees. Dhillon says the department "may take legal action afterwards." That would play out in court after today, not at the polls.
- The Maine allegations. A review of video isn't a finding. If anything comes of it, it will come later.
- Whether today goes as promised. The judge left the case open for complaints filed today.
For voters, the practical part: if someone near your polling place asks you questions after you vote, you can answer or walk on. Inside, only election judges run the room. In Minnesota, voting questions go to the secretary of state at 1-877-600-VOTE (SOS), and intimidation goes to an election judge, the police and the attorney general's Election Report Form. Nationally, DOJ's Voting Section takes complaints at 800-253-3931 (DOJ). And once polls close, remember that some results take days by law.
What the Right Says
The conservative and Republican case
The administration and its supporters say this is a decades-old program doing its job on a bigger scale, and that watching makes elections more trustworthy. "Sending monitors to election polls does not sow distrust in elections—quite the contrary!" Dhillon wrote on X after a 60 Minutes interview we covered in October. In her Oct. 23 video she framed the job as civil-rights enforcement: language help, disability access and voter intimidation.
President Trump said the same about monitors sent to Fulton County, Georgia:
Post: Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) on X, Oct. 25, 2026.
"They're not going to do anything other than watch," he said. "We want to all have honest elections."
Supporters point to the record. DOJ posted monitoring announcements for primaries this year. In Arizona in July, three counties gave DOJ staff credentials to observe inside, and the department called that cooperation good for "both election security and appropriate access to the franchise for all Americans" (DOJ). Monitors "only observe and take notes," DOJ attorney James Catania wrote to Pennsylvania, according to Votebeat. "Monitors follow all rules of the state and jurisdiction." On the court fight, the administration notes that the judge found the NAACP unlikely to succeed. "[A] reasonable voter would not be intimidated from voting simply from seeing a plain clothes non-law enforcement official volunteer at a election site," Walton wrote.
Sources & Citations
- Hennepin County Attorney's Office, “United States Department of Justice election monitors expected during general election”, November 2, 2026.
- Hennepin County Attorney's Office, “Hennepin County Attorney's Office shares information on U.S. Department of Justice election monitor request”, August 10, 2026.
- Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes, “Minn. Stat. § 204C.06, Conduct in and near polling places”, January 1, 2026.
- Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, “52 U.S.C. § 10305, Use of observers”, January 1, 2026.
- U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, “About Federal Observers and Election Monitoring”, January 1, 2026.
- U.S. Department of Justice, “Justice Department to Conduct Election Monitoring in New Hampshire Primary Election”, September 8, 2026.
- U.S. Department of Justice, “Justice Department Announces Monitoring of Polling Sites in Three Arizona Counties”, July 21, 2026.
- U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (copy via Just Security), “NAACP v. Blanche, No. 1:26-cv-03626-RBW, Memorandum Opinion and Order (Doc. 22)”, November 2, 2026.
- NAACP, “The NAACP and Advancement Project Sue to Block DOJ Plans to Deploy Federal Law Enforcement As 'Election Monitors'”, October 16, 2026.
- KSTP, “Department of Justice to send election monitors to Minnesota”, November 2, 2026.
- FOX 9, “Department of Justice to send election monitors to Minnesota”, November 2, 2026.
- MPR News, “Federal election monitors 'can't be disruptive' by law, secretary of state says”, October 22, 2026.
- Reuters (via Yahoo News), “Monitoring the monitors: US states prepare for surge of Justice Dept election watchers”, October 21, 2026.
- Votebeat, “Trump administration sending election monitors to observe the 2026 election in all 50 states”, October 31, 2026.
- NBC News, “DOJ will deploy a record number of monitors on Election Day”, November 2, 2026.
- Bangor Daily News, “What we know about the Lewiston voting footage federal prosecutors are reviewing”, October 31, 2026.
- WGME, “Department of Justice plans to send election monitors to Lewiston, Portland”, October 26, 2026.
- Minnesota Attorney General's Office, “Attorney General Ellison releases Election Report Form”, October 20, 2026.
- Minnesota Secretary of State, “Secure and Fair Elections”, January 1, 2026.
- X (@AAGDhillon), “Harmeet Dhillon post on X (largest monitoring effort)”, October 23, 2026.
- X (@RapidResponse47), “Rapid Response 47 post on X (President Trump on poll monitors)”, October 25, 2026.
- X (@HennepinAtty), “Hennepin County Attorney posts on X”, November 2, 2026.
Positions above are attributed to the public statements and published reporting cited here. Quotations are taken from these sources; Radio Purple does not publish unattributed or invented quotes. See an error? Request a correction.

