trust

President Trump and his allies are questioning ballot security. Democrats are warning of unconstitutional federal intervention. Experts and others are raising concerns about partisan redistricting and federal immigration agents intimidating people at the polls.

Voter trust in the upcoming midterm elections, meanwhile, has dropped off sharply, and across party lines, according to new research by the UC San Diego Center for Transparent and Trusted Elections.

Out of 11,406 eligible voters surveyed between mid-December and mid-January, just 60% said they were confident that midterm votes will be counted fairly — down from 77% who held such confidence in vote counting shortly after the 2024 presidential election.

Shifts in voter confidence are common after elections, with voters in winning parties generally expressing more confidence and voters in losing parties expressing less, said Thad Kousser, one of the center’s co-directors. However, the new survey found double-digit, across-the-board declines in confidence in the last year, he said.

According to voting experts, such drops in confidence and fears about voter intimidation are alarming — and raise serious questions about voter turnout in a pivotal midterm election that could radically reshape American politics.

While 82% of Republicans expressed at least some confidence in vote counting after Trump’s 2024 win, just 65% said they felt that way in the latest survey. Among Democrats, confidence dropped from 77% to 64%, and among independents from 73% to 57%, the survey found.

“Everyone — Democrats, Republicans, independents alike — have become less trusting of elections over the last year,” Kousser said, calling it a “parallel movement in this polarized era.”

Of course, what is causing those declines differs greatly by party, said Kousser’s co-director Lauren Prather, with distrust of mail ballots and noncitizens voting cited by half of Republicans, and concerns about eligible voters being unable to cast ballots because of fear or intimidation cited by nearly a quarter of Democrats.

Trump and other Republicans have repeatedly alleged that mail ballots contribute to widespread fraud and that noncitizen voting is a major problem in U.S. elections, despite neither claim being supported by evidence.

Dean C. Logan, Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, oversees the registering of voters, maintaining voter files, administering federal, state, local and special elections and verifying initiatives, referenda and recall petitions.

(Gary Coronado / For The Times)

Many Democratic leaders and voting experts have raised concerns about disenfranchisement and intimidation of eligible voters, in part based on Republican efforts to enforce stricter voter ID and proof of citizenship requirements, and Trump suggesting his party should “take over” elections nationwide.

Others in Trump’s orbit have suggested Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents will be deployed to polling stations, and the FBI recently raided and seized ballots from Fulton County, Ga., long a target of Trump’s baseless claims of 2020 election fraud.

Prather said that research has long showed that “elite cues” — or messaging from political leaders — matter in shaping public perception of election security and integrity, so it is no surprise that the concerns being raised by Trump and other party elites are being echoed by voters.

But the survey also identified more bipartisan concerns, she said.

Voters of all backgrounds — including 51% of Democrats, 48% of independents and 34% of Republicans — said they do not trust that congressional districts are drawn to fairly reflect what voters want. They primarily blamed the opposing party for the problem, but nearly a quarter of both Democrats and Republicans also expressed dissatisfaction with their own party leaders, the survey found.

Various states have engaged in unprecedented mid-decade redistricting to win more congressional seats for their party, with Republicans seizing advantage in states such as Texas and Democrats seizing it in states such as California.

Voters of all backgrounds — including 44% of Democrats, 34% of independents and 30% of Republicans — also said they believe it is likely that ICE agents will be present at voting locations in their area, though they did not all agree on the implications.

Half of Democrats said such a presence would make them feel less confident that votes in their area would be counted accurately, compared with fewer than 14% who said it would make them more confident. Among Republicans, 48% said it would make them more confident, and about 8% less confident. Among independents, 19% said more confident, 32% less confident.

Perceptions of ICE at polling locations also varied by race, with 42% of Asian American voters, 38% of Hispanic voters, 29% of white voters and 28% of Black voters saying it would make them feel less confident, while 18% of Asian American voters, 24% of Hispanic voters, 27% of white voters and 21% of Black voters said it would make them feel more confident.

Among both Black and Hispanic voters, 46% said they expect to face intimidation while voting, compared with 35% of Asian American voters and just 10% of white voters. Meanwhile, 31% of Hispanic and Asian American voters, 21% of Black voters and 8% of white voters said they are specifically worried about being questioned by ICE agents at the polls.

A man waits in line to vote at Compton College in November.

(Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)

Kousser said voters’ lack of confidence this cycle reflects a remarkable moment in American politics, when political rhetoric has caused widespread distrust not just in the outcome of elections, but in the basic structure and fairness of how votes are collected and counted — despite those structures being tested and proven.

“We’re at this moment now where there are people on both sides who are questioning what the objective conditions will be of the election — whether people will be able to freely make it to the polls, what the vote counting mechanisms will be — and that’s true sort of left, right, and center in American politics today,” he said.

Prather said research in other countries has shown that distrust in elections over time can cause voters to stop voting, particularly if they think their vote won’t be fairly counted. She does not think the U.S. has reached that point, as high turnout in recent elections has shown, but it is a longer-term risk.

What could have a more immediate effect are ICE deployments, “especially among groups that have worries about what turning out could mean for them if they expect ICE or federal agents to be there,” Prather said.

Election experts said voters with concerns should take steps to ensure their vote counts, including by double-checking they are registered and making a plan to vote early, by mail or with family and friends if they are worried about intimidation.

What voters should not do if they are worried about election integrity is decide to not vote, they said.

“The No. 1 thing on my list is and always will be: Vote,” said Sean Morales-Doyle, director of the Voting Rights and Elections Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law. “That sounds maybe trite or simple, but the only way we hold on to our democracy is if people continue to participate and continue to trust it and put their faith in it.”

Registrar voter staff members process ballots at the Orange County Registrar of Voters in Santa Ana in November.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

“Now is the time to buckle down and figure out how to fortify our protections for fair elections, and not to give into the chaos and believe it’s somehow overwhelming,” said Rick Hasen, an election law expert and director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project at UCLA Law.

“I don’t want people to feel like nothing is working, it’s all overwhelming and they are just being paralyzed by all the news of these attacks, these threats,” said Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the Voting Rights Project at the ACLU. “There are a huge range of folks who are working to ensure that these elections go as smoothly as possible, and that if anything comes up, we are ready to respond.”

Mike Madrid, a Republican political consultant in California, said the erosion of confidence in U.S. elections was “a deliberate strategy” pushed by Trump for years to explain away legitimate election losses that embarrassed him, and facilitated by Republicans in Congress unwilling to check Trump’s lies to defend U.S. election integrity.

However, Democrats have added to the problem and become “the monster they are fighting” by gerrymandering blue states through redistricting measures such as California’s Proposition 50, which have further eroded American trust in elections, Madrid said.

Madrid said that he nonetheless expects high turnout in the midterms, because many voters have “the sense that the crisis is existential for the future, that literally everything is on the line,” but that the loss of trust is a serious issue.

“Without that trust, a form of government like democracy — at least the American form of democracy — doesn’t work,” he said.

Trump — who in a post Friday called Democrats “horrible, disingenuous CHEATERS” for opposing voter ID laws that most Americans support — has long called on his supporters to turn out and vote in massive numbers to give him the largest possible margin of victory, as a buffer against any election cheating against him. One of his 2024 campaign slogans was “Too Big to Rig.”

In recent days, some of Trump’s fiercest critics — including Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) — have made a similar pitch to Democrats.

In an interview with The Times, Schiff said that he is “deeply concerned” about the midterms given all of Trump’s threats, but that voters should understand that “the remedy here is to become more involved, not less.”

“The very best protection we’ll have is the most massive voter turnout we’ve ever had,” he said. “It’s going to be those with the most important title in our system — the voters — who end up saving this country.”

Speaking at the Munich Security Conference, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said a “deep rift” has opened between Europe and the United States and called to “repair and revive transatlantic trust”.

The ICE officers descended on Compton, targeting immigrants convicted of theft, child abuse and selling drugs.

There were no protesters. No whistles alerting targets to the officers’ presence. No face masks. In some cases, residents opened their doors to let the officers inside their homes. One man thanked them for not arresting him in front of his children.

The Los Angeles area operation ended with 162 arrests, including a Mexican national convicted of rape and a Salvadoran national convicted of voluntary manslaughter. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said almost 90% of the people arrested had criminal convictions.

It was June 2018, more than a year into Donald Trump’s first term as president. More than seven years later, carrying out the same operation in L.A. or other U.S. cities feels almost impossible without drawing angry crowds and requiring multiple officers, at times across federal agencies, to detain a single target.

In the years since Trump’s first term, ICE and the government’s immigration enforcement apparatus expanded raids well beyond those against known criminals or suspected ones. Increasingly, immigrants with no criminal records and even legal residents and U.S. citizens found themselves stopped and sometimes arrested.

The uncertainty over who is being targeted has fueled a growing pattern of community protests and rapid response mobilizations, even when officials say they are targeting convicted felons, reflecting a widening gap between how enforcement is described and how it is experienced. That gap has become most visible on the ground.

In recent months, sightings of ICE or other federal agents have drawn crowds of protesters, legal observers and community organizers. In many cases, residents say they can’t distinguish between targeted enforcement actions — against child molesters, human smugglers and other serious criminals — and broader sweeps, responding instead to the mere presence of agents whose role and authority are no longer clearly understood.

Experts say the Trump administration’s hostile rhetoric against immigrants and often seemingly indiscriminate targeting of people in neighborhoods has hurt the reputation of its immigration enforcement agencies, including ICE and Border Patrol, like never before. And it has inspired a mass movement of resistance that has seen Americans shot by federal immigration officers. In the last month, two U.S. citizens — Renee Nicole Good and Alex Jeffrey Pretti — were shot dead by ICE and Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis.

The fatal shootings forced Trump to recalibrate his immigration enforcement tactics, in part by sidelining Border Patrol Cmdr. Gregory Bovino, who first launched the aggressive raids in California, and putting border policy advisor Tom Homan in charge.

“I’m not here because the federal government has carried out this mission perfectly,” Homan said during a Thursday news conference. “Nothing’s ever perfect, and anything can be improved on. And what we’ve been working on is making this operation safer, more efficient, by the book.”

He said street operations in Minnesota would “draw down” if the agents were given access to local jails and that agents would focus on specific targets.

“We will conduct targeted enforcement operations — targeted,” he added. “That has traditionally been the case and that’s what we’re going to continue to do and improve upon that with the priority on public safety threats.”

An internal memo reviewed by Reuters showed ICE officers operating in the state were directed to avoid engaging with “agitators” and only target “aliens with a criminal history.”

Even if the Trump administration were to pull back ICE and Border Patrol’s aggressive tactics to focus more on known criminals, experts question whether too much damage has been done to their reputations.

“The brand of the agency is becoming so toxic,” said John Sandweg, who headed ICE under President Obama. “It’s going to impact the agency for years to come. It’s going to take a long time for that trust to rebuild.”

Another former ICE official, who asked not to be named out of fear of retaliation, said the agency used to be able to say it was focused on criminals and wasn’t conducting random sweeps.

“For years we always said, ‘We don’t have the resources to go after everybody, so we’re going to focus on just the worst of the worst,’” he said. “They can’t say that now. They’re still trying to do that, but it’s getting overshadowed by Home Depot and car washes and all this other stuff and Border Patrol’s heavy-handed tactics. Now it’s leading to shootings and all these other things. It’s just horrible.”

In Willowbrook, an unincorporated neighborhood nestled in South L.A., just blocks from Compton city limits, federal agents found themselves locked between angry crowds recording them last week. Two people held a sign that read: “ICE / Soldiers off our streets.”

Federal agents clear the way for an authorized car to pass while investigating a shooting involving a federal agent in Willowbrook.

(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

The agents were there to arrest a man they say had been “involved in human trafficking” and had a final removal order. They alleged the man had two prior arrests for domestic violence. Homeland Security officials later said the man used his vehicle to ram federal agent vehicles in an attempt to evade arrest, prompting an agent to open fire.

But as news spread that the operation was targeting a suspected criminal living in the country illegally, most residents shrugged it off. They said federal officials had made false claims against other people they had arrested or shot at, including labeling Good and Pretti as domestic terrorists.

“They’ve shown us that they’re not trustworthy,” Rosa Enriquez, 39, said while holding a Mexican flag.

Similar scenes have played out across the country. This month, a journalist posted a video of agents — who she identified as working for ICE — calling out a driver for honking during an operation St. Paul, Minn.

“We’re here to arrest a child sex offender and you guys are out here honking,” the agent said. “That’s who you guys are protecting. Insane.”

“Just go. You’re lying!” a woman shouts.

Homeland Security has made it a point to tout the arrests of criminals across the country. The “worst of the worst arrests” in L.A. this month, according to the agency, included a man convicted of second-degree murder, another for voluntary manslaughter and one with multiple convictions for driving under the influence and disorderly conduct.

“We will not let rioters or agitators slow us down from removing murderers, rapists, pedophiles, gang members, and terrorists,” Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement.

But experts say the general public has clearly witnessed a shift in who is being targeted.

In May, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller reportedly directed top ICE officials to go beyond target lists and have agents make arrests at Home Depot or 7-Eleven convenience stores as they sought to crank up their daily arrest numbers to 3,000.

Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino, center, marches with federal agents to the Edward R. Roybal Federal Building.

(Carlin Stiehl/Los Angeles Times)

The following month, Border Patrol agents led by Bovino were on the ground in L.A., tackling car wash workers, arresting street vendors and chasing down day laborers.

“The pressure of those numbers on enforcement agencies and mobilizing the whole of government and other law enforcement agencies, well beyond the traditional ICE and CBP, has created pressures that have led to extensive overreach,” said Doris Meissner, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank in Washington. Customs and Border Protection, or CBP, is the agency that includes ICE and Border Patrol.

At the peak of arrests in L.A in June, around 75% of people had no criminal conviction. A Times analysis found that in the administration’s first nine months, from Jan. 1 to Oct. 15, of the more than 10,000 Los Angeles residents who were arrested in immigration operations, about 45% had a criminal conviction and an additional 14% had pending charges.

In November the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, reported that, nationwide, 5% of detainees from Oct. 1 to Nov. 15 had been convicted of violent crimes. Most detainees with convictions were found guilty of vice, immigration or traffic infractions.

“They’ve painted to the American people that they were going after the worst of the worst, and that is nothing like what is happening,” said Assemblymember Mike A. Gipson (D-Carson), who represents the district where the recent shooting in L.A. unfolded. “We have seen all across America where they have harassed, they have murdered, assassinated not only citizens but also people who have not had any arrest, who have not fit the bill or the description of what they have painted to the American people.

“When you turn on the news right now, the trust is absolutely gone. We don’t trust the White House, we don’t trust ICE, and the people are afraid because the trust is gone.”

Santa Maria Councilmember Gloria Soto echoed that sentiment, in part because she has seen raids in her Central Coast town.

“That’s part of the frustration,” Soto said. “There’s no transparency. There’s no information being shared before or after these enforcements have taken place.”

“We know for a fact that there are individuals who are getting picked up who did not have a criminal record, whose only quote-unquote crime was, you know, either having an expired visa, or crossing without the required immigration documentation that is needed, so it makes it really difficult for us, for me as an elected official, to trust what this agency is doing because so far there is no communication,” she said.

The challenges ICE officers are facing appear to center on cities that have been targeted with surge operations — like in Minneapolis, Sandweg said. Across the country, he said, officers are conducting operations “but not with the same amount of controversy.”

People take part in a vigil at a memorial for Alex Pretti in Minneapolis.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

“In Minneapolis we’re at the point now when, if agents are going to go after someone with a very serious violent criminal history, they’re likely to pick up observers and a lot of attention,” he said. “The way in which they wanted to do these operations in such an overt, in-your-face kind of fashion, has created a dynamic that makes it really hard for the agents to execute their duties. … You have these protests following the agents everywhere they go.”

While there has always been consternation over immigration enforcement, Sandweg said that “the widespread tactics and the targeting of people with no criminal record just really galvanized people in a way they’ve never been galvanized before.”

“To where now it probably is starting to bleed into and impeding operations that most of those protesters are probably not opposed to — the idea of ICE getting someone with a violent criminal history off the streets,” he said. “I think it’s created an environment where it puts the officers and the public in harm’s way.”

This week, protesters came out in force when word spread that ICE officers were eating at a restaurant in Lynwood. A video shows the crowd jeering at the officers as they’re being escorted out of the area by Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies.

Almost immediately, Lynwood City Councilmember Luis Gerardo Cuellar posted a video on Instagram to inform the public.

“This was not ICE, these were … TSA air marshals.”

The Trump administration has not shied away from sharing AI-generated imagery online, embracing cartoonlike visuals and memes and promoting them on official White House channels.

But an edited — and realistic — image of civil rights attorney Nekima Levy Armstrong in tears after being arrested is raising new alarms about how the administration is blurring the lines between what is real and what is fake.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s account posted the original image from Levy Armstrong’s arrest before the official White House account posted an altered image that showed her crying. The doctored picture is part of a deluge of AI-edited imagery that has been shared across the political spectrum since the fatal shootings of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti by U.S. Border Patrol officers in Minneapolis

However, the White House’s use of artificial intelligence has troubled misinformation experts who fear the spreading of AI-generated or AI-edited images erodes public perception of the truth and sows distrust.

In response to criticism of the edited image of Levy Armstrong, White House officials doubled down on the post, with Deputy Communications Director Kaelan Dorr writing on X that the “memes will continue.” White House Deputy Press Secretary Abigail Jackson also shared a post mocking the criticism.

David Rand, a professor of information science at Cornell University, says calling the altered image a meme “certainly seems like an attempt to cast it as a joke or humorous post, like their prior cartoons. This presumably aims to shield them from criticism for posting manipulated media.” He said the purpose of sharing the altered arrest image seems “much more ambiguous” than the cartoonish images the administration has shared in the past.

Memes have always carried layered messages that are funny or informative to people who understand them, but indecipherable to outsiders. AI-enhanced or AI-edited imagery is just the latest tool the White House uses to engage the segment of Trump’s base that spends a lot of time online, said Zach Henry, a Republican communications consultant who founded Total Virality, an influencer marketing firm.

“People who are terminally online will see it and instantly recognize it as a meme,” he said. “Your grandparents may see it and not understand the meme, but because it looks real, it leads them to ask their kids or grandkids about it.”

All the better if it prompts a fierce reaction, which helps it go viral, said Henry, who generally praised the work of the White House’s social media team.

The creation and dissemination of altered images, especially when they are shared by credible sources, “crystallizes an idea of what’s happening, instead of showing what is actually happening,” said Michael A. Spikes, a professor at Northwestern University and news media literacy researcher.

“The government should be a place where you can trust the information, where you can say it’s accurate, because they have a responsibility to do so,” he said. “By sharing this kind of content, and creating this kind of content … it is eroding the trust — even though I’m always kind of skeptical of the term trust — but the trust we should have in our federal government to give us accurate, verified information. It’s a real loss, and it really worries me a lot.”

Spikes said he already sees the “institutional crises” around distrust in news organizations and higher education, and feels this behavior from official channels inflames those issues.

Ramesh Srinivasan, a professor at UCLA and the host of the “Utopias” podcast, said many people are now questioning where they can turn to for “trustable information.” “AI systems are only going to exacerbate, amplify and accelerate these problems of an absence of trust, an absence of even understanding what might be considered reality or truth or evidence,” he said.

Srinivasan said he feels the White House and other officials sharing AI-generated content not only invites everyday people to continue to post similar content but also grants permission to others who are in positions of credibility and power, such as policymakers, to share unlabeled synthetic content. He added that given that social media platforms tend to “algorithmically privilege” extreme and conspiratorial content — which AI generation tools can create with ease — “we’ve got a big, big set of challenges on our hands.”

An influx of AI-generated videos related to Immigration and Customs Enforcement action, protests and interactions with citizens has already been proliferating on social media. After Good was shot by an ICE officer while she was in her car, several AI-generated videos began circulating of women driving away from ICE officers who told them to stop. There are also many fabricated videos circulating of immigration raids and of people confronting ICE officers, often yelling at them or throwing food in their faces.

Jeremy Carrasco, a content creator who specializes in media literacy and debunking viral AI videos, said the bulk of these videos are likely coming from accounts that are “engagement farming,” or looking to capitalize on clicks by generating content with popular keywords and search terms such as ICE. But he also said the videos are getting views from people who oppose ICE and DHS and could be watching them as “fan fiction,” or engaging in “wishful thinking,” hoping that they’re seeing real pushback against the organizations and their officers.

Still, Carrasco also believes that most viewers can’t tell if what they’re watching is fake, and questions whether they would know “what’s real or not when it actually matters, like when the stakes are a lot higher.”

Even when there are blatant signs of AI generation, like street signs with gibberish on them or other obvious errors, only in the “best-case scenario” would a viewer be savvy enough or be paying enough attention to register the use of AI.

This issue is, of course, not limited to news surrounding immigration enforcement and protests. Fabricated and misrepresented images following the capture of deposed Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro exploded online earlier this month. Experts, including Carrasco, think the spread of AI-generated political content will only become more commonplace.

Carrasco believes that the widespread implementation of a watermarking system that embeds information about the origin of a piece of media into its metadata layer could be a step toward a solution. The Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity has developed such a system, but Carrasco doesn’t think that will become extensively adopted for at least another year.

“It’s going to be an issue forever now,” he said. I don’t think people understand how bad this is.”

Huamani writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Jonathan J. Cooper in Phoenix and Barbara Ortutay in San Francisco contributed to this report.