stalls

Intelligence briefings have warned of the potential for extremists and criminals to target ⁠the FIFA World Cup 2026 at a time when hundreds of ⁠millions of dollars of approved security funds have been delayed, causing United States preparations to fall behind.

The previously unreported briefings from US federal and state officials and FIFA, the international federation overseeing the World Cup, outlined the risk of extremist attacks, including attacks on transportation infrastructure and civil unrest related to President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

The football World Cup, one of the ⁠globe’s biggest sporting events, will be held in June and July this year across three countries – the United States, Canada and Mexico.

While security at such events is always intense, US law enforcement officials have been on especially heightened alert since the start of the US-Israeli war on Iran, and have raised concerns over retaliatory threats.

Officials working to prepare for the World Cup in the US have increasingly sounded alarms in recent weeks over a stalled $625m in ⁠federal security grants for the event that were part of a Republican-backed spending bill passed in July 2025.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency, tasked with distributing the money, said in November that it was expecting to allocate the funds no later than January 30.

Following inquiries by Reuters this month after officials and organisers complained that they had still received nothing, FEMA announced on Wednesday that it had awarded the grants, saying the money would “bolster security preparations”.

With the first matches kicking off in Mexico on June 11 and then the US and Canada the next day, states and cities hosting the events are deep into planning, including how to safeguard from possible attacks. The delayed funding and threat warnings have compounded ‌an already complex process, multiple officials involved told Reuters.

The grant money distribution process normally takes months, and efforts to buy technology and equipment can take even longer, according to Mike Sena, president of the National Fusion Center Association, which represents a network of 80 information centres across the US that facilitate federal, state and local intelligence sharing.

“It will be extremely tight,” he said.

A December 2025 intelligence report from New Jersey looking at potential threats to matches in the state – which will include the final – flagged recent domestic attacks, disrupted terror plots and a proliferation of extremist propaganda. The report also noted the possibility of spontaneous gatherings related to tensions between countries.

Another intelligence report, dated September 2025, described an online post appearing to encourage attacks on railroad infrastructure during the World Cup that said there were “plenty of opportunities for us to knock it off the tracks” and highlighted matches on the West Coast of the US and Canada. The documents were obtained through open records requests by the transparency nonprofit Property of the People.

Delayed funding risks lead to growing concerns, while ICE worries mount

Democrats have blamed outgoing US Department ⁠of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem for delaying the release of the money. Under Noem’s leadership, the DHS also withheld hundreds of millions of dollars in homeland security funds last ⁠year from a dozen Democratic-led states and Washington, DC, while pressing them to increase immigration enforcement.

In response to a request for comment, White House spokesman Davis Ingle faulted Democrats for the delayed funding, citing disagreements over immigration enforcement tactics.

“The president is focused on making this the greatest World Cup ever while ensuring it is the safest and most secure in history,” Ingle said in a statement. “The Democrats need to stop playing games.”

Trump’s immigration crackdown has already cast a pall over the event and raised concerns about the presence of US ⁠Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. Since Trump took office in January 2025, masked immigration agents have rounded up suspected immigration offenders in US cities and detained some tourists at airports.

That has coincided with a Trump-era dropoff in overall international visitors, according to US Commerce Department data. Early signs have, however, indicated still strong appetite for flight bookings ⁠and ticket sales for the tournament.

In a FIFA weekly intelligence briefing dated January 28, analysts warned that anti-ICE activism in US cities in response ⁠to immigration enforcement could lower the barriers “to hostile actions by lone actors or extremist elements”.

Trump has also placed full or partial travel bans on nationals of more than three dozen countries, including Iran, which is in talks with FIFA to move its matches to Mexico due to its current conflict with the United States. Three other countries whose fans face Trump travel bans – Haiti, Ivory Coast and Senegal – have also qualified for the tournament.

Security concerns extend to FIFA World Cup 2026 fan events

Several World Cup and state officials have said “FIFA Fan Festival” events are of particular concern. The events ‌allow large numbers of people to watch matches together on open-air screens.

A Fan Festival event that had been planned in Liberty State Park in Jersey City for the duration of the tournament was cancelled unexpectedly last month and replaced with smaller gatherings.

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill said at the time that many smaller events would allow more people in the area to enjoy the experience. Security concerns also factored in the decision, a person familiar with ‌the ‌planning said.

US Representative Nellie Pou, a Democrat representing a district in New Jersey that includes MetLife Stadium, one of the sites where games will be played, said that each of the World Cup’s 104 matches would be equivalent to a Super Bowl.

“Local government, local law enforcement, will certainly have their hands full,” Pou said. “They need every single dollar that they are eligible to receive, and they need it now.”

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — While the U.S. Senate remains deadlocked over President Trump’s call for strict citizenship voting requirements, Republicans in some states are pressing ahead with their own measures that could require documentary proof of citizenship to join or remain on the voter rolls.

Proof-of-citizenship legislation won final approval this week in South Dakota and Utah, already has passed one chamber in Florida and received a committee hearing in Missouri. In Michigan, supporters of voter citizenship documentation submitted 750,000 petition signatures this week in a bid to get a constitutional amendment on the November ballot.

Federal law already prohibits noncitizens from voting in U.S. elections, with violators subject to fines, imprisonment and potential deportation.

When people register to vote, they affirm under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens. But Trump contends that’s not enough. He wants prospective voters to show proof of their citizenship.

Democrats and voting rights advocates say the Republican measures amount to voter suppression, as they may prevent many eligible voters from casting ballots. Similar laws have been overturned by courts as an unconstitutional burden on voting rights.

What would the federal legislation do?

The federal Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or SAVE America Act, would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote. That could be satisfied with such things as a U.S. passport, citizen naturalization certificate or a combination of a birth certificate and government-issued photo identification.

The federal bill also would require a photo identification to cast a ballot, which some states already mandate. The Republican-led House approved the legislation last month on a mostly party-line vote, but it has stalled in the Senate under a filibuster threat from Democrats.

South Dakota and Utah

Legislation passed in South Dakota and Utah would create a two-tier voting system. People who provide documentation of their citizenship could vote in all elections. Those who don’t could vote only in federal elections for president, U.S. Senate and U.S. House.

The bifurcated voting system is modeled after Arizona, where tens of thousands of voters who have not provided proof of citizenship can cast ballots only in federal elections. Arizona implemented its system after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2013 that the state could not require citizenship documentation for federal elections.

The bills in South Dakota and Utah would take effect upon a governor’s signature, meaning they could be in place for newly registered voters ahead of the November elections.

Utah’s bill also directs election officials to use an online service from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to check the citizenship status of existing voters. Those flagged would be sent notices asking for proof of citizenship to remain eligible to vote in all elections.

Florida and Michigan

Neither the Michigan initiative nor legislation passed by the Florida House would require people to submit proof of citizenship when registering to vote. Instead, the measures would create a behind-the-scenes review that could result in some people being asked for citizenship documentation.

Under the Michigan measure, the secretary of state would review driver’s license records, juror records and federal Homeland Security and Social Security data to determine whether registered voters are citizens. Those flagged would be removed from the voter rolls if they cannot provide proof of citizenship.

The Florida legislation would require election officials to verify the citizenship of all registered voters using the state’s driver’s license database. Anyone whose citizenship could not be verified would be required to submit documentary proof.

Why are some pushing for proof of citizenship?

Trump and some fellow Republicans have complained for years about noncitizens voting in U.S. elections, although evidence of doing so is rare. The few cases found are not nearly enough to affect an election result, studies have shown, and those caught face severe penalty.

In 2024, a student from China was charged with perjury and attempted illegal voting after registering to vote by showing a University of Michigan student ID and signing a document asserting he was a U.S. citizen. He later contacted a local clerk’s office requesting to get his ballot back, and ultimately fled the country.

The case provided part of the impetus for the Michigan ballot initiative, said Paul Jacob, chairman of Americans for Citizen Voting, which is backing the measure.

“We want a system we can have confidence in,” Jacob said. “The way you avoid big problems in elections is to fix the small problems when they rise up and present themselves.”

Voting rights advocates’ concerns

Constitutional amendments limiting voting to “only citizens” have won widespread support when placed on state ballots. But voting rights advocates note that requiring documentary proof can get complicated.

During a recent debate in the Florida House, Democratic state Rep. Ashley Gantt recounted how her aunt was born in a South Carolina home at a time when some hospitals didn’t accept Black patients. As a result, she has no birth certificate and has had difficulty trying to demonstrate her citizenship, Gantt said.

A proof-of-citizenship law “would stop many thousands — if not more — U.S. citizens from voting in Florida,” said Michelle Kanter Cohen, policy director and senior counsel at the nonprofit Fair Elections Center. “It requires documentation that a lot of eligible citizens don’t have, or don’t have access to.”

Nationwide, about 21 million people — 9% of voting-age citizens — lack documentary proof of citizenship or cannot easily obtain it, according to a 2024 report by the Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement at the University of Maryland.

Other states

Legal challenges are common when states pass proof-of-citizenship requirements for voters.

After Kansas adopted a proof-of-citizenship law 15 years ago, more than 31,000 U.S. citizens ended up getting blocked from registering to vote. Federal courts declared the Kansas law an unconstitutional burden on voting rights, and it hasn’t been enforced since 2018.

Two years ago, New Hampshire and Louisiana both passed proof-of-citizenship laws, prompting lawsuits. New Hampshire’s law went to trial last month and is awaiting a ruling. Louisiana’s election commissioner acknowledged in a December court filing that the requirement has not been enforced.

A nonprofit group also filed a legal challenge to a Wyoming proof-of-citizenship law passed last year. But a federal court dismissed that case while ruling the group lacked standing to sue.

Lieb writes for the Associated Press.