The Trump administration's justice department is testing the separation of powers in the final weeks before the US midterms, according to critics who say it has broken with the department's longstanding practice of political neutrality. Democratic senators and advocacy groups say federal agencies have targeted state and local election administration, raising questions about federal authority over voting.

What actions are being taken?

Four Democratic senators — Mark Warner, Dick Durbin, Alex Padilla and Gary Peters — sent a letter to Attorney General Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel requesting information about a series of actions. The senators alleged that the department and the FBI have seized ballots and election materials, sought personal information about election workers and volunteers, questioned election officials at their homes, threatened prosecution, sought unredacted voter rolls and raided a voting rights nonprofit.

According to the senators, these efforts often appeared to come at the behest of President Trump and White House officials, including Stephen Miller. They also said senior department officials threatened to fire or override prosecutors who declined to pursue election fraud cases.

Is the justice department testing separation of powers?

A separate letter from Padilla, Durbin and Sheldon Whitehouse urged Blanche to publicly reaffirm the department's election non-interference policy and rule out seizing ballots or equipment before voting, counting and certification are complete. The senators said the confirmation was needed because department leaders have sent conflicting signals.

In one escalation, the department filed a lawsuit against California seeking to bar it from counting ballots from more than 20,000 voters it alleges are noncitizens, the AP reported. The Campaign Legal Center said the administration is trying to assert authority over elections that the Constitution gives to the states and Congress.

FAQ

What are senators asking Attorney General Blanche to do?

They want him to publicly pledge that the department will not seize ballots or election equipment before voting and certification are complete.

Why is the department's involvement controversial?

Critics say it breaks with a decades-long practice of avoiding the appearance of election interference and could undermine confidence in the results.