After years of calling former President Donald Trump a “threat to Democracy” and bemoaning January 6 as the worst day in American history since September 11, a slate of top Democrats are now refusing to commit to certifying a Trump victory in November. According to an Axios report, several House Democrats have placed conditions on certifying a Trump win and have already said that they anticipate the former president using illicit or unethical means of achieving that win.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who tried to halt Trump’s certification following the 2016 election, said that Democrats “would obviously accept” a Trump victory if he “won a free, fair, and honest election” but added that he “definitely” doesn’t “assume that Trump would use free, fair, and honest means to secure a victory.” Raskin claimed that Trump “is doing whatever he can to try to interfere with the process, whether we’re talking about manipulating electoral college counts in Nebraska or manipulating the vote count in Georgia or imposing other kinds of impediments.”

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), who tried to block certification of George W. Bush’s 2004 election win, said that Democrats would have to “make sure that all the rules have been followed.” She added, referring to Trump, “I don't know what kind of shenanigans he is planning.” Following her comments to Axios, Schakowsky issued a statement saying that she was “proud to … join all my Democratic colleagues in certifying the 2020 election” and is looking forward to “doing the same in January 2025.”

Other Democrats have made similar remarks. Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), another Trump objector following the 2016 election, explained that his “expectation” is to certify a potential Trump victory, “assuming everything goes the way we expect it to.” He added, “We have to see how it all happens.” Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), former chairman of the January 6 committee, said that whether or not congressional Democrats object to a Trump win, they may take their argument to court. He pointed out that there are “enough provisions in law … so that losers who feel aggrieved in their loss can take it to court.”

In comments to The Washington Stand, FRC Action Director Matt Carpenter said, “For Jamie Raskin and other House Democrats to insinuate that Georgia requiring hand recounts of ballots and Nebraska possibly reconsidering how it allocates its electoral college votes is somehow evidence of Trump interfering in the election is itself election interference.” He continued, “Election administration is a state responsibility. Raskin might be frustrated that efforts from House Democrats to do away with voter identification, allow illegal immigrants to vote, and extend pandemic-era ballot drop boxes nationwide failed.” He added, “But he would do well to get out of the way and let the states do what they think is best to ensure voting in the 2024 election is accessible to as many legal voters as possible and free from fraud.”

However, most congressional Democrats have indicated that they would certify a Trump win. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said, “House Democrats are going to do everything necessary to … ensure that the winner of the presidential election is certified on January 6th without drama or consequences.” Jeffries’s ally Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Mich.) chimed in, “I expect we would do as we did in 2016.” He continued, “While disappointed with the outcome of the election and despite a handful of outliers making a ‘statement,’ we did not object then [nor] would we now object to the result of a democratic election.”

Earlier this year, Raskin joined Representatives James Clyburn (D-S.C.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) in suggesting that a Trump victory might be dismissed outright, depending on whether or not the U.S. Supreme Court determined Trump eligible to hold the office of president again. Carpenter commented at the time, “For more than three years Democrats and their allies in the press have tried to scare the American people by claiming that Donald Trump, and his voters, are a threat to democracy. This is even a central part of the president’s reelection strategy.” He added, “However, what is painfully obvious to any honest observer is that it is the Democrats who have weaponized law enforcement and the courts to go after their political opponents.”