Consider this nightmare midterms scenario: Democrats whomp Republicans in the House of Representatives, as polling currently suggests they will.
But the race for Senate control is closer.
As counting in early November grinds on, it becomes clear that control of the Senate hinges on a few thousand votes in a single Senate race. Those votes are all that separates Congress from a 50/50 Senate in which Vice President JD Vance presides as a tiebreaker vote and a 51/49 Democrat majority.
What then? A given Senate candidate could refuse to concede, tapping into fraud allegations. Anyone who remembers 2020 will recall the baseless MAGA world conspiracy theories Trump allies boosted to try to delay the certification of that election. The same plan could lead to a lengthy fight over certifying key Senate races, with a Trumpified DOJ doing what it was prevented from doing in 2020: throwing its weight into the process, setting up a slow-moving fight over control of the body hinging around just one closely decided race. With a pre-emptive lawsuit targeting Alaska, the DOJ has shown its ready to go.
Each state has its own process for certification, governing how it canvasses and formalizes a given senator’s win in the state. The process covers disputes, including how officials are to respond to lawsuits, and which officials, in the end, have the authority to certify an election. In some states, these positions have been taken over by 2020 election deniers. In others, state legislatures have passed laws making it easier to file mass voter challenges. Activists have used these laws to challenge thousands of voters and ballots, raising concerns that those disqualified might exceed the margin of a victory or loss. Similarly, some states have cooperated with the DOJ in its effort to obtain each state’s voter roll, raising the prospect that the DOJ itself might challenge the vote. .
Once the outcome of a state’s election reaches the Senate, it has a series of procedures laid out to govern disputes. But, unlike the states, they’re not laid out in statute: the Senate largely decides these things through norms that have calcified over the centuries. States send their certificates of election to the vice president — so, JD Vance — and the Senate Rules Committee plays a role in deciding disputed elections.
Below, we break down the certification protocol in each state where Senate races are expected to be tight. We look at how states canvass the vote, making sure ballots are in and properly counted. We look at the process for certification. We look at who can challenge voters individually or en masse, and who can challenge state officials decisions. We look at what it takes to trigger a recount, and how that recount works.
We hope this helps you wrap your head around how things might unfold should Trump and his allies attempt to interfere, overturn or otherwise challenge election results next week.
Texas
Who’s in charge?
When experts fret about Republicans trying to overturn a 2026 election, they usually point to Texas. If Democrat James Talarico wins the Senate race, it’ll likely be by a very small margin, and the current attorney general, Ken Paxton (R) — not exactly known for his integrity — is Talarico’s Republican opponent. One of Paxton’s claims to fame is leading a (quickly tossed) lawsuit to challenge battleground state election certifications in 2020.
Certification-wise, local authorities (usually county commissioners) meet to conduct the canvass no later than 14 days after Election Day. No later than 24 hours after the local canvass, the county clerk must deliver the certified results — and a separate slate of certified returns for the gubernatorial race — to the secretary of state. For statewide races except the gubernatorial, the governor then conducts the state canvass and certification at a time set by the secretary of state — no earlier than 18 days after and no later than 33 days after Election Day. For the governor’s race, the results are canvassed by the state legislature and certified by the speaker of the House.
Completing the canvass, certification and recount processes are all mandatory duties of election officials, and can be enforced with a mandamus action in state court.
Still uneasy? You’re not alone. Since his attempted 2020 ratfuckery, Paxton has tried to get ballots tossed in Houston, lawfare Beto O’Rourke out of running in 2026 and indict the Travis County clerk. In addition, when the all-Republican Supreme Court prevented him from expanding his power to prosecute election crimes, he helped get the recalcitrant judges ousted and replaced with those who acceded to him (He still hasn’t tested those powers, though, and many experts think they’d still be found to be unconstitutional.). He could also seek a court order to seize ballots, though they’d remain in the custody of the court.
Paxton’s office gives him unusual power to challenge the election, and he’s shown a willingness to cry (unsubstantiated) fraud and go after election officials before. But courts have proven adept at turning back his brand of lawsuits before, and experts generally express confidence that they’ll hold again.
Who can challenge?
In Texas, an automatic recount is only triggered in the case of a tie. The losing candidate in a race decided by a plurality vote may petition for a recount if the margin is less than 10% of the votes received by the winning candidate. The request must be submitted by 5 p.m. on the third business day after the initial canvass is complete, and begun either no later than the seventh day after the petition was approved or the day after all ballots have been delivered to the proper authorities (whichever is later).
A registered voter can challenge the qualifications of another voter in the same county by sworn statement. it is a felony to include intentionally misleading information, and the statement must be predicated on personal, first-hand information. There would then be a noticed hearing before the registrar.
Alaska
Who’s in charge?
Alaska certifies its elections via a state review board, based in Juneau. The official who actually certifies the result, however, is the director of the state’s Division of Elections, an agency housed within the office of the Lieutenant Governor. This time around, Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom will oversee the process alongside Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher, a Republican, who tried in 2023 to remove the state from a non-partisan voter roll maintenance system. As you may have guessed, Beecher found a reason to try: election denial conspiracy theories about the system, the Electronic Registration Information Center, known as ERIC. Beecher’s efforts ultimately failed – Alaska stayed in ERIC.
Who can challenge?
The state pays for a recount if the margin is 0.5 percent or less; appeals after a recount go to the state Supreme Court. Contesting an election over fraud allegations works differently: in that case, a candidate has to prove, in state court, fraud large enough to change the result. There’s no process under Alaska law that allows for mass challenges to votes. Instead, individual election officials and poll watchers can challenge voters that they believe to be unqualified.
Elections Director Beecher’s aggressive effort to purge the state’s voter rolls before the midterms has resulted in controversy that’s reached from the state to Washington. After the state DMV sent a list of 3,000 people who might not be eligible to vote, Beecher removed them all. More than 600 people were wrongly removed, she later told state lawmakers. Beecher also gave the DOJ an unredacted version of the state’s voter rolls last year, prompting as-yet-unrealized concerns that the DOJ may use the information to try to block people from voting.
Trump has already ordered the feds to try to interfere in the state’s certification. In October, the DOJ sued to block the state from certifying its election if Mary Peltola wins; the lawsuit