Democrats are examining several ways President Donald Trump could seek to interfere with the coming midterm elections, according to a new piece in The New York Times. The article identifies one little-discussed scenario involving a single official whose removal could disrupt the process of seating a newly elected House of Representatives — and, under House rules, could be legally attempted.

Writing Monday for the Times, veteran reporter Jeffrey Toobin said Trump’s "obsession" with preventing a Republican wipeout in the midterms remains an active concern, even as his efforts to promote claims of election fraud have so far failed to gain traction. Toobin interviewed Rep. Joe Morelle, a New York Democrat, about Democratic planning for multiple possible post-election scenarios, including efforts by the president or his allies to block certification of some results after voting concludes. That concern has received less attention recently as Trump has focused on efforts related to who is allowed to vote.

"The process for installing a new House of Representatives begins when the states certify the results in each of the 435 races. The rules vary by state, but most require election officials to certify by late November or early December," Toobin explained. "In recent years, Trump-aligned local officials have frequently used false claims of fraud or noncitizens voting as justification to decline to certify election results. Since 2020, more than 30 local officials in Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, North Carolina and Pennsylvania have refused to certify election results, many in hopes of forestalling Democratic victories."

Morelle said Democrats’ response to that possibility would be to sue Trump or allied officials, noting that "Democrats have had success" recently in using the courts to compel local officials to certify election results. Certification is a key step because states transmit formal results that determine who appears as members-elect when the next Congress convenes.

Toobin also described another potential point of vulnerability: the clerk of the House of Representatives, whose duties include assembling the "roll" of incoming members who are to be sworn in on Jan. 3, 2027. The current clerk, Kevin McCumber, is widely viewed as a "nonpartisan" official and would not be expected to cooperate with any demand from Trump to interfere with the swearing-in of members. Because the House must organize itself at the start of a new Congress before it can conduct ordinary legislative business, the initial roll can shape who is recognized to participate in that process.

"One disaster scenario, according to Mr. Morelle, would be this: After results show the Democrats winning a majority in the House, the president declares that the election is full of fraud and the winners don’t need to be certified," Toobin wrote. "Mr. Trump could then demand that Speaker Mike Johnson fire Mr. McCumber, which Mr. Johnson has the legal right to do. Under the procedures of the House, the speaker can install a more compliant successor — that is, a G.O.P. toady. In this scenario, Speaker Johnson’s designee, at Mr. Trump’s instigation, would produce a roll of new House members that included Republicans in races that Democrats believed they had won."

Toobin added that although the speaker has unilateral authority to remove the clerk, a permanent replacement would require approval by a vote of House members. Morelle told the Times that Johnson might not be able to persuade his narrow Republican majority to replace McCumber under such circumstances.

“You’d have a number of members who are retiring, who I think would no longer be beholden to Johnson or the president, who I think would take a very, very dim view of efforts to overturn the election," Morelle said.