Mark Kelly

June 18 (UPI) — Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., introduced a bill Thursday called the Protect Our Polls Act that would block the president from sending soldiers or federal agents to voting sites during elections.

The bill comes after President Donald Trump said he wouldn’t rule out sending the National Guard or Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to polling places in November.

“I’d do anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections,” The Hill reported Trump told reporters in May.

Slotkin said the bill would prevent Trump from “weaponizing our military and armed federal officers to interfere in our elections.”

The legislation, if passed, would require approval from Congress before a president could send uniformed military or federal law enforcement to polling sites. It would also require 48 hours’ notice to lawmakers, intel, legal justification and evidence that proves a state can’t handle a threat on its own.

The bill is backed by senators Tammy Baldwin, Wis.; Ruben Gallego, Ariz.; Mark Kelly, Ariz.; Amy Klobuchar, Minn.; Alex Padilla, Calif.; Jacky Rosen, Nev.; and Raphael Warnock, Ga.

In a statement, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told NBC, “If Democrats really cared about securing our elections, they would pass the SAVE America Act which includes commonsense election integrity measures supported by the vast majority of Americans.”

Federal and state laws already ban deployment of troops and agents from elections, except “to repel armed enemies of the United States.”

“The idea that a president would send troops or armed agents to polling places to intimidate voters is un-American and illegal,” Kelly said in a statement. “Federal law has protected polling places from military interference since the Civil War for a reason. President Trump has made clear he thinks he can ignore those limits. We’re making sure he can’t.”

Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin said in March that he wouldn’t send agents to polling places without good reason.

“The only reason why my officers would be there is if there was a specific threat for them to be there, not for intimidation,” Mullin said. “There will be a reason for us to be there, and it’ll be known why we’re there.”

1 of 2 | Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., speaks at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on February 24. He said Sunday that he was concerned about the depletion of the U.S. military’s weapons stockpile amid the war in Iran. File Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo

May 11 (UPI) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said his department will “review” comments made by Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., about the U.S. military’s weapons stockpiles.

Hegseth’s renewed criticism into Kelly came in response to the senator’s appearance Sunday on CBS’ Face the Nation. Kelly, a retired Navy captain and former astronaut, said he received Pentagon briefings and it was “shocking … how deep we have gone into these magazines.”

“We’ve expended a lot of munitions. And that means the American people are less safe. Whether it’s a conflict in the western Pacific with China or somewhere else in the world, the munitions are depleted,” Kelly said.

In a post on X on Sunday evening, Hegseth questioned whether Kelly violated his oath by discussion the matter publicly.

“Now he’s blabbing on TV (falsely & dumbly) about a *CLASSIFIED* Pentagon briefing he received,” Hegseth said in his post, promising to have the Pentagon’s legal counsel review the comments.

Kelly said the information he shared wasn’t classified because Hegseth spoke on the topic during a hearing of the Senate Committee on Armed Services last week.

“We had this conversation in a public hearing a week ago and you said it would take ‘years’ to replenish some of these stockpiles. That’s not classified, it’s a quote from you.”

Kelly also shared a video of Hegseth’s comments from the hearing in his response on X.

The two leaders have been embroiled in a legal battle after Hegseth tried to censure and demote Kelly from his military rank over comments he made in November telling service members that they have the right and duty to ignore “unlawful orders” made by the Trump administration. Hegseth also sought to reduce Kelly’s retirement pay, calling his remarks “seditious.”