ATLANTA — A federal judge has denied Fulton County’s request to recover 2020 election ballots and materials that federal agents confiscated from an Atlanta-area storage facility, ruling Wednesday that the Justice Department may continue holding the seized items.
U.S. District Judge J.P. Boulee issued the decision after county attorneys contended that the ballots and related election documents, along with any digital copies created by federal officials, should be given back due to an illegal and unconstitutional seizure.
Federal agents conducted the January 28 confiscation at the election operations center in Georgia’s largest county, a Democratic stronghold that encompasses most of Atlanta. Fulton County has faced repeated unsubstantiated allegations from President Donald Trump and supporters claiming massive voter fraud altered the 2020 election outcome.
According to the Justice Department, investigators are examining “irregularities that occurred during the 2020 presidential election in the County” and have identified potential violations of two federal statutes. One law mandates preserving election records for 22 months, while another criminalizes obtaining, casting or counting false or fraudulent ballots.
The 2020 presidential results in Georgia underwent three separate counts, including a complete hand recount, with each tally confirming Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.
Neither Fulton County representatives nor Justice Department officials immediately provided comments about Wednesday’s decision. The county maintains the option to challenge the ruling in the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
“The seizure in this case was certainly not perfect,” Boulee stated in his 68-page decision. However, he determined that Fulton County failed to demonstrate that officials “callously disregarded” its constitutional protections “either through the lack of probable cause, omissions in the Affidavit or by the manner of the execution of the seizure.”
The county also could not prove it requires the materials or would suffer permanent damage without their return, the judge noted, especially since federal officials provided copies of the documents to the county.
Following the January confiscation, the Justice Department secured a grand jury subpoena in April requesting names and contact details for Fulton County workers and volunteers who participated in the 2020 election. County officials filed a motion Monday seeking to invalidate that subpoena, claiming it exceeds reasonable scope and aims to intimidate political adversaries.
The Trump administration has pursued similar efforts to access election records from other battleground states. Federal agents used a subpoena in March to obtain documents from a 2020 presidential election review in Arizona’s Maricopa County. In April, the Justice Department ordered Michigan’s Wayne County to surrender its 2024 election ballots.
Federal officials are simultaneously battling multiple states in court for voter information containing private personal details. Election administrators, including Republican officials, have stated that releasing such information would breach state and federal privacy protections.
Democratic leaders have expressed alarm that the Trump administration is misusing federal law enforcement to pursue the president’s personal vendettas and may be plotting interference in upcoming midterm elections. Administration officials maintain they are investigating past irregularities and working to safeguard future elections.
At a March 27 hearing regarding Fulton County’s demand for return of its ballots and materials, county lawyers contended the seizure was improper and unjustified, showing “callous disregard” for Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches. They suggested the Trump administration chose to use a criminal search warrant after becoming impatient with civil litigation the Justice Department initiated last year to obtain the same materials.
Federal prosecutors defended their warrant application process and document seizure as appropriate. They emphasized that simultaneous civil and criminal investigations on the same matter occur regularly.
Judge Boulee acknowledged the warrant affidavit contained “defective” elements and included some “troubling” statements. However, he observed that the FBI agent who prepared it also presented “facts that both hurt and helped him.” He determined the document’s flaws do not constitute callous disregard.
The judge further agreed that the government may pursue both civil and criminal cases on identical issues and concluded the investigation timeline contradicts the county’s claim that the Justice Department “created an ‘ongoing investigation’ to sidestep procedural hurdles” in civil proceedings.
