South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem said the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible for safeguarding the 2026 federal elections, prompting a PBS NewsHour fact‑check of the claim.
The fact‑check compared Noem’s statements with DHS’s publicly posted mission and budget documents, which describe the agency’s core duties as protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure, cyber networks, and responding to threats, but do not assign it authority to oversee or certify election results.
What the Right Is Saying
Republican officials and Noem’s office maintain that DHS’s cyber‑security responsibilities naturally extend to protecting election‑related systems from foreign interference. Governor Noem’s press release quoted her as saying the agency “plays a critical part in keeping our elections safe from outside threats,” and the House Committee on Homeland Security’s Republican chair, Rep. Michael McCaul (R‑TX), argued that DHS’s existing cyber‑defense programs already support election infrastructure.
What the Left Is Saying
Democratic leaders and voting‑rights groups argue that Noem’s remarks mischaracterize DHS’s role and could be used to justify broader federal involvement in elections. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D‑WI) said the statement “blurs the line between protecting infrastructure and interfering in the democratic process,” and the ACLU noted that DHS lacks statutory authority to manage election administration, warning that such claims may fuel unfounded concerns about election integrity.
What the Numbers Show
DHS’s FY 2026 budget allocated $1.3 billion to election‑security initiatives, a portion of its overall $55 billion budget, reflecting a focus on cyber protection rather than direct election administration. The agency reported 112 cyber incidents targeting election‑related systems in the 2025‑2026 cycle, a 7 percent increase from the prior year, according to its annual security report. A Pew Research poll released in January 2026 found that 48 percent of Americans believe the federal government should have a larger role in election security, while 42 percent prefer state and local control.
The DHS website lists its mission as protecting the nation from terrorism, cyber threats, and natural disasters, with no mention of overseeing election outcomes or certifying results.
The Bottom Line
The fact‑check confirms that DHS’s statutory mission does not include managing elections; its involvement is limited to cybersecurity and infrastructure protection. The differing interpretations of the agency’s role reflect broader partisan debates over federal versus state control of election security, and the issue will likely reappear in upcoming congressional hearings on election‑integrity legislation.