Understanding the Threats to U.S. Election Security in 2024

news sites by Russia”>fake news sites by Russia. Meanwhile, the U.S. public’s faith in the integrity of the 2024 election not only continues to split across party lines, but also demonstrates a concerningly low lack of trust overall in the electoral process. In one poll, only 1 in 5 Trump supporters say that they will strongly trust the electoral results if he loses, whereas 3 in 5 supporters of Democratic candidate and Vice President Kamala Harris say that they will trust the results regardless of outcome.  

What did authorities learn four years ago, and what still needs to be done? 
The main lesson drawn by the January 6 Committee report [PDF] was that U.S. law enforcement agencies, chiefly the U.S. Capitol Police, underestimated the extent to which Trump might aggravate his supporters and mobilize them to march on the U.S. Capitol. Given that Trump has repeatedly denigrated the integrity of both U.S. elections and law enforcement agencies, security services need to prepare for the Republican candidate to incite unrest once again should he fail to win the election. A recent Pew survey found that only 24 percent of U.S. citizens believe Trump would publicly acknowledge an electoral defeat—he has still not acknowledged his 2020 defeat. 

After the catastrophic security failures displayed on January 6, it is unlikely that law enforcement and intelligence agencies will once again be caught unprepared. The Department of Homeland Security recently designated January 6 as a National Special Security Event, establishing the U.S. Secret Service as lead agency and providing a range of new resources. Although this step will ensure security services put in place a more robust deterrent posture on that day, it will not deter violence on other important ceremonial dates connected to the electoral cycle, nor will it support local partners facing low-level unrest. Moreover, the Secret Service’s continued organizational challenges and protection failure earlier this year may have diminished its credibility to lead a strong response.  

Political leaders, in tandem with their counterparts in civil society, need to take a responsible approach to acknowledging the trust deficits and credibility gaps that continue to define this election and voters’ view of the integrity of the electoral process. Educating the American people about the integrity and resilience of electoral infrastructure to “pre-bunk” conspiracy theories about the vote and pushing back against any narratives that would support political violence or the intimidation of electoral workers, candidates, and voters, will be mission critical for both parties in the days directly leading up to and after the election. Safe and secure elections need to be defended from foreign interference this year, but not nearly as much as they will need to be protected from domestic actions.   

Kat Duffy is Senior Fellow for Digital and Cyberspace Policy at CFR. Jacob Ware is Research Fellow. This article is published courtesy of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).This work represents the views and opinions solely of the authors. The Council on Foreign Relations is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher, and takes no institutional positions on matters of policy.