DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin says he will use “maximum pressure” against jurisdictions that refuse election-security review

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin escalated his public warnings about election security on Friday, telling states they could face pressure if they do not partner with the Department of Homeland Security as DHS launches a widespread review of election systems, according to The Hill. Mullin said foreign adversaries could hack voter machines, and he warned that he would use “maximum pressure” to identify and address any ballots that were cast illegally.

Mullin’s remarks came after President Donald Trump, in a primetime address Thursday, called for increased election-security measures, The Hill reported. The contrast in tone, the outlet said, was that Mullin went further in describing the potential threat environment and the consequences for jurisdictions that do not participate in DHS-led efforts.

According to The Hill, Mullin’s Friday address framed the review as a federal responsibility tied to national security, with DHS taking a direct role in examining election infrastructure. The outlet reported that Mullin threatened states that do not cooperate, positioning the department as prepared to intensify oversight and enforcement-related actions.

Mullin also asserted that foreign adversaries could attempt to compromise voting systems and related processes, and he said his department would work to identify any illegally cast votes. The Hill described the “maximum pressure” language as a warning to states about the potential consequences of non-cooperation during the election security posture DHS is pursuing.

The Hill did not specify in its summary what form of pressure DHS would apply to non-participating states, such as grants, certifications, litigation, or other measures. The report instead emphasized Mullin’s vow to apply maximum pressure and to focus on illegally cast ballots, alongside his claim about foreign hacking risks.

The practical impact of DHS’s election-security review, as framed in Mullin’s remarks, would be felt through election administration at the state level. State and local election officials typically manage voting systems, voting access policies, and day-to-day administration, while federal agencies can provide technical assistance and coordinate security measures. If Mullin’s threats translate into increased federal scrutiny, jurisdictions could face additional compliance requests, assessments, and reporting tied to DHS’s review.

The Hill’s account also underscored that Mullin’s statements were made in the context of an ongoing public debate about how federal officials should handle potential election security threats, including cybersecurity and the legitimacy of ballots. Mullin’s comments add to the pressure on states to decide how they will cooperate with DHS security activities and what thresholds or standards DHS will emphasize.

Following the Friday remarks, the immediate next step for states and election administrators would be determining how DHS requests will be structured and what cooperation looks like in practice, given Mullin’s warning of “maximum pressure.” The Hill’s report highlighted Mullin’s intention to root out illegally cast votes, while also pointing to the broader DHS initiative to review election systems as the organizing framework for that effort.