FIFA President Gianni Infantino is managing his third World Cup as the tournament spreads across North America this weekend. His previous tournaments were held in Russia and Qatar — autocratic countries with centralized governments willing to allocate resources and leverage the games for global image management. In America, where 78 of the 104 matches will be played, Infantino faces a dramatically different governance structure: democratically elected leaders distributed across 11 host communities.
Infantino initially approached North America as he did Russia and Qatar: winning over the head of state and working downward. He went so far as to present President Donald Trump with a peace prize before diplomatic tensions escalated with Iran. However, state and local politicians maintained their own priorities, creating friction with FIFA's hierarchical expectations.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative observers note that America's decentralized structure has repeatedly frustrated international organizations accustomed to dealing with centralized governments. A senior FIFA official acknowledged earlier this year that while it was exaggerated to suggest one person in Qatar or Russia simply snapped their fingers and things happened, America operates differently. "He's not interested in politics — only in football," said a longtime Infantino adviser speaking to Tim Röhn of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network, which includes POLITICO.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's participation in the bipartisan ticketing investigation reflects conservative principles about holding international bodies accountable to American law. The fact that one red state joined three blue states in scrutinizing FIFA suggests nonpartisan agreement that the organization must operate within U.S. legal frameworks.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive Democratic officials have seized on federalism's structural advantages to extract concessions from FIFA. New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill, who did not bid for the World Cup but now must help fund it amid competing state priorities, engaged in a public dispute with FIFA over transportation costs. While FIFA ultimately refused to budge, the confrontation highlighted the leverage local officials wield.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani publicly challenged FIFA's ban on water bottles inside stadiums — and won. After the mayor attacked the policy, FIFA reversed its position. "I think that's just a big difference, even compared to other western democracies, our federalism is a huge difference," said Alex Lasry, CEO of the New York New Jersey Host Committee.
On the legal front, attorneys general from three Democratic-leaning states and Republican-controlled Texas have launched joint investigations into FIFA's ticketing practices, suggesting bipartisan concern about the organization's operations on American soil.
What the Numbers Show
The 2026 World Cup marks a significant logistical footprint: 104 total matches, with 78 staged across American venues — roughly 75 percent of the tournament occurring on U.S. soil. Matches will be played in 11 different host communities across multiple states and jurisdictions.
FIFA's national partners in Mexico and Canada exercise more direct influence over World Cup operations in their countries than the White House wields in America, where no sports minister exists at the federal level to serve as a single point of contact. Massachusetts required a five-member special board to approve licensing for seven matches — a structure that extracted concessions from the local host committee before games could proceed.
The Bottom Line
FIFA's experience hosting its first World Cup in North America exposes a fundamental tension between the organization's hierarchical governance model and America's federalist structure. Infantino, who previously navigated centralized autocracies in Russia and Qatar, must now coordinate across multiple layers of democratic government — each with independent authority and competing priorities.
This decentralized reality means no single American official can deliver outcomes for FIFA the way counterparts could in previous host nations. The organization's encounters with state attorneys general over ticketing practices, New Jersey's transportation dispute, and New York's water bottle reversal illustrate how local power centers have created friction throughout preparations. What happens next will test whether FIFA can adapt its institutional culture to operate within a democratic framework that distributes authority widely — rather than concentrating it at the top.