The 2026 midterms change Congress amid disputes over voting and executive power

A fight over who may be counted comes before Election Day

In the days before the November 3, 2026, midterms, federal officials challenged the voter eligibility procedures used by states, including California. The administration said it was enforcing the federal prohibition on noncitizen voting. Civil-rights groups and state officials said some government lists wrongly identified legally registered citizens as ineligible. Federal judges, including James Boasberg and Tanya Chutkan, restricted parts of the administration’s attempts to direct how states should handle the disputed names. Courts also addressed attempts to set aside thousands of mail ballots. The rulings concerned voter lists and the limits of federal authority, not a finding that the entire election was fraudulent.

The Justice Department sent election monitors to jurisdictions across the country. Administration officials said monitoring would support the law and public trust. Critics questioned the choice of locations, including communities with large Black and Latino populations, and warned about intimidation. State election offices continued to apply their own registration, identification and counting rules. Election officials had to carry out those tasks while lawyers argued in court, political figures made public accusations and voters lined up at polling places.

A new majority emerges despite the district maps

After the November 3 vote, news organizations projected that Democrats had won control of both the House of Representatives and Senate. Republicans had entered the election controlling both chambers. Rising household prices, the prolonged war with Iran and dissatisfaction with President Trump were prominent concerns in voter interviews. The results included Democratic wins in states and districts that had supported Trump two years earlier. Republicans challenged Democrats’ policies on taxes, immigration and public spending, but the election results changed the balance of legislative power.

Both major parties had also fought over congressional district lines. Republicans backed mid-decade redistricting in several states, while California Democrats pursued changes designed to improve their party’s representation. Maps altered political opportunities but did not determine every race. Some candidates overcame boundaries thought favorable to the other party. Courts and voters in different states treated particular plans differently. The resulting House was shaped by district design, but also by millions of individual voting decisions.

The new Congress will confront the president in January

As of November 9, the winners were preparing for the next Congress, scheduled to convene on January 3, 2027. President Trump remained in office and retained the powers of the presidency, including the veto. Democratic leaders discussed investigations and oversight of his administration; some also raised impeachment, while others urged attention to living costs. Republicans said they would resist what they considered politically motivated investigations. Any new committee inquiry would still need documents, witnesses and a defined legal authority. The election changed who could demand those answers; it did not decide in advance what any investigation would find.