WASHINGTON — The country’s cybersecurity agency has been vital in assisting states to enhance the protection of their voting systems. However, its future election-related mission is now in question due to ongoing criticism from Republican lawmakers and influential voices from the Trump administration.
President Donald Trump has yet to appoint a new leader for the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). For the first time since the agency’s establishment, there are no scheduled discussions by its leadership at the current annual meeting of the nation’s secretaries of state in Washington.
During a recent panel addressing cyber threats, an update from an FBI representative revealed that the nature of these threats remains unchanged. “I frequently get asked about the major cyber threats confronting the U.S., and our answer has consistently included: China, along with ransomware threats from Russia, Iran, and North Korea,” noted FBI Cyber Division deputy assistant director Cynthia Kaiser at the National Association of Secretaries of State meeting.
Kristi Noem, the new homeland security secretary, expressed during her Senate confirmation hearing that CISA had deviated significantly from its intended mission. She committed to collaborating with senators who wish to implement legislative measures to rein in the agency’s actions.
Founded in 2018 during Trump’s initial term, CISA is tasked with safeguarding the nation’s essential infrastructure, which encompasses everything from dams and nuclear plants to banks and voting systems. While operating under the Department of Homeland Security, CISA functions as an independent agency with its own Senate-confirmed director.
The agency has garnered bipartisan approval from a considerable number of state and local election officials. However, Trump and his supporters have voiced frustration regarding CISA’s initiatives to counteract misinformation linked to the 2020 election and the COVID-19 pandemic. Trump dismissed the agency’s first director, Chris Krebs, after he validated a statement from election officials that labeled the 2020 election as “the most secure in American history,” a move that incited Trump’s anger as he contested his defeat to Joe Biden.
Since then, Republicans have repeatedly accused CISA of colluding with social media platforms to suppress conservative viewpoints on election-related and health matters. CISA officials have denied these claims, with former director Jen Easterly stating last fall that “CISA does not censor, nor has it ever.” Nevertheless, calls for changes to the agency persist among Republican circles.
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who leads the newly established House subcommittee focusing on government efficiency, criticized Biden’s CISA, claiming it was more concerned with undermining Trump than ensuring the protection of critical infrastructure.
Throughout the 2020 election, CISA worked collaboratively with states to inform social media companies about misleading information proliferating on their platforms. Agency representatives asserted that they never coerced these companies into action. As the 2024 elections approach, CISA and various federal entities have warned the public about several foreign misinformation efforts, including a fraudulent video attributed to Russia that allegedly displayed ballot mishandling in Pennsylvania.
Recently, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg echoed Republican sentiments, announcing plans to dismantle the company’s fact-checking program.
Shortly after his return to office on January 20, Trump signed an executive order aimed at “ending federal censorship” and instructed his attorney general to explore investigations into federal activities from the prior administration, proposing possible corrective measures.
A conservative proposal known as Project 2025 suggested relocating CISA to the Department of Transportation, limiting its focus strictly to safeguarding governmental networks and coordinating critical infrastructure security. The blueprint recommended that the agency assist states purely in assessing their “cyber hygiene” in preparation for elections.
Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, a Republican often mentioned as a potential CISA leader, praised the agency’s cybersecurity initiatives and expressed confidence that Secretary Noem would prioritize this mission. He noted that grievances concerning the agency’s role in combating misinformation were outdated.
“CISA came to understand that such activities weren’t within their primary focus and have shifted away from that work,” LaRose remarked.
Voting systems were classified as critical infrastructure following Russia’s interference efforts during the 2016 presidential election, which included scanning state voter registration databases for vulnerabilities. Initially, some state election officials expressed hesitance toward federal support, but many now credit CISA and federal funding with significantly bolstering security in both the 2020 and 2024 presidential elections.
Minnesota’s Secretary of State Steve Simon, a Democrat and president of the association of secretaries of state, acknowledged that a new administration typically requires time to determine CISA’s operative role. Nonetheless, he expressed hope that the agency would continue its collaborative efforts with states to enhance election security and highlight misinformation campaigns.
“Understanding whether a foreign adversary is attempting to mislead Americans on any topic, whether related to elections or science, is crucial,” he emphasized in a phone conversation before heading to Washington.
