Department officials also said that a career lawyer in the criminal division advised all lawyers in the United States on the matter over the summer as part of a broader electoral fraud briefing, and that the department has always recognized that there were exceptions to the policy.
The new guidance fueled fears that Trump’s political nominees, led by Barr, were exercising the Justice Department’s power to help his candidacy for re-election. Democrats, civil rights attorneys and former employees of departments of the Republican and Democratic administrations have been on alert this year for unusual departmental political movements in the service of the president’s relentless – and false – claims that the United States electoral system is being undermined by fraud.
Specifically, they have been wary of recent cases based on allegations of electoral fraud that generate more headlines than substantive accusations. Republicans have been trying for years to defend the idea that there is a problem of electoral fraud in the United States, despite little evidence to support their claims.
During Trump’s presidency and his candidacy for re-election, conservative efforts to find electoral fraud have failed. Shortly after defeating Clinton in 2016, he claimed that millions of Americans had voted illegally for her and appointed a legalist to examine the matter. No evidence has ever been found to support Mr Trump’s claim. But that did not stop him from continuing to repeat the statements, especially in the last few months, while campaigning.
Democrats and legal and election experts said Trump and Barr are laying the groundwork to claim that the election was rigged if the president loses.
The Justice Department could “build a narrative, despite the absence of any evidence, of fraud in the postal vote, so that Trump can challenge the election results if he gets lost,” said Joyce Vance, a former US attorney in Alabama during the Obama administration.
“They told us that this is their strategy and we are looking at its implementation,” said Vance.
Wendy R. Weiser, director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, said she did not believe the justification for changing the policy had merit. “If they want to prevent the misconduct that concerns them, they can remind people of the law and announce that they will prosecute any offender to the fullest extent of the law,” she said. “This does not require an exception to this sensible and long-standing policy.”