Listen to the article
U.S. Defense Secretary’s False Claims About Election Troops Spark Controversy
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stirred controversy during a recent congressional hearing when he claimed that former President Joe Biden deployed troops to polling stations in 15 states during the 2024 election. The assertion, made on April 29, 2026, quickly drew scrutiny from lawmakers and fact-checkers alike.
“I will note that in 2024, troops were deployed—that was Joe Biden by the way, Joe Biden—were deployed to polling locations in 15 states,” Hegseth stated during the hearing. He repeated a slightly modified version of the claim the following day, saying “under Joe Biden’s administration, 15 states deployed” troops to polling stations.
Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin directly challenged Hegseth’s assertion in a subsequent Senate hearing, calling it false and questioning whether he would consider deploying federal troops to seize voter rolls.
A thorough investigation reveals Hegseth’s claim is indeed false. Federal law explicitly prohibits sending federal troops to voting locations “unless such force be necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States.” No such deployment occurred during the 2024 election.
What actually happened was significantly different. Governors in 15 states activated their National Guard units—primarily for cybersecurity assistance and general support—using state authority, not federal. The National Guard Bureau confirmed this in a statement: “Guard members were activated under state authority under the control of their governors and adjutants general in support of civilian partners.”
The states that activated National Guard personnel included Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Illinois, North Carolina, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, and West Virginia. Additionally, Colorado, Florida, Nevada, and Washington, D.C. placed Guard personnel on standby.
Representatives from multiple states confirmed that National Guard members were not stationed at polling locations. Delaware deployed just 15 personnel who worked remotely or at the state’s Department of Technology and Information on cybersecurity matters. Illinois has had National Guard cybersecurity personnel available for every federal election since 2018, but they were not physically present at polling sites.
Oregon’s situation further highlights the inaccuracy of Hegseth’s claim. Luke Harkins, press secretary for Oregon Governor Tina Kotek, noted, “Secretary Hegseth’s information is incorrect. The notion that the Oregon National Guard was activated at polling locations is simply false. Oregon is a 100% vote-by-mail state and has been for over two decades.”
In New Mexico, Guard members provided cybersecurity assistance and offered a secure building at their Santa Fe headquarters for the Secretary of State to monitor operations. The state recently passed legislation specifically prohibiting federal troops or armed federal agents from being deployed to polling places or ballot drop box locations.
Pentagon spokesperson Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder emphasized in a news conference on November 4, 2024, that the National Guard “has ongoing and long-standing relationships with local, state and federal agency partners and has assisted with national special security events like Election Day and Inauguration Day for many years.”
Washington state had some National Guard troops on standby for potential civil unrest, but never deployed them. West Virginia and Pennsylvania’s Guard members focused on cybersecurity support and interagency coordination, respectively.
Hawaii’s public affairs director for the state defense department, retired Maj. Jeff Hickman, was particularly clear, stating the governor did not “deploy or activate the Hawaii National Guard to support the 2024 elections” at all.
The controversy highlights tensions surrounding election security and the role of military forces in civilian democratic processes—a sensitive topic in American politics, particularly following recent contentious election cycles. It also demonstrates the importance of factual accuracy when public officials make claims about such consequential matters.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
The prohibition on federal troops at polling sites is an important safeguard that must be upheld. I’m glad to see lawmakers and fact-checkers taking this issue seriously and ensuring the public has accurate information.
Thank you for sharing this update. It’s good to see lawmakers and fact-checkers closely scrutinizing such claims. Transparency and accuracy are vital for the integrity of our democratic process.
The prohibition on federal troops at polling sites is an important safeguard. I’m glad the investigation found Hegseth’s statements to be false. Voters deserve to have confidence in the electoral system.
Maintaining the separation of military and electoral processes is crucial for preserving the integrity of our democracy. I’m encouraged to see the robust fact-checking and scrutiny applied to these claims.
Agreed. Transparency and accountability are vital to maintaining public trust in the electoral system.
This is a concerning allegation, but I’m relieved to see it was thoroughly debunked. Maintaining the separation of military and electoral processes is crucial. Fact-based reporting is essential.
Interesting claims about troops being deployed to polling stations. It’s important to rely on authoritative sources and verified information when it comes to elections. Fact-checking is crucial to ensure public trust.
I appreciate the diligence in verifying the claims about troop deployments. It’s critical that we have reliable information, especially when it comes to the fundamental right to vote. Misinformation can undermine faith in democracy.
Absolutely. Protecting the integrity of elections should be a top priority for all Americans, regardless of political affiliation.