Justice Department can keep 2020 election ballots seized from Georgia’s Fulton County, judge rules

ATLANTA — The federal government can keep 2020 election ballots from Georgia’s Fulton County that were seized by the FBI from a warehouse near Atlanta, a judge ruled Wednesday.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge JP Boulee came after county attorneys argued that ballots and other election materials, as well as any electronic copies made by the Justice Department, should be returned because the seizure was improper and unconstitutional.

The Jan. 28 seizure by the FBI targeted the election center of Georgia’s most populous county, which is heavily Democratic and includes most of the city of Atlanta. Fulton County has been at the center of unfounded claims by President Donald Trump and his allies that widespread voter fraud cost him the 2020 election.

The Justice Department said it was investigating “irregularities that occurred during the 2020 presidential election in the county” and identified two laws that may have been violated. One requires that voter records be retained for 22 months, while the other prohibits obtaining, casting or tabulating false, fictitious or fraudulent ballots.

Georgia’s votes in the 2020 presidential race were counted three times, including once by hand, and each count confirmed Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.

“The seizure in this case was certainly not perfect,” Boulee wrote in his 68-page decision. But he said Fulton County had not established that his rights were cruelly violated “either because of the lack of probable cause, omissions in the affidavit or the manner in which the seizure was executed.”

The county also failed to demonstrate that it needed the documents or would suffer irreparable harm if they were not returned, he wrote, noting that this is particularly true because the Justice Department provided the county with copies of the documents.

Representatives for Fulton County and the Department of Justice did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment on the decision Wednesday evening.

Months after the January seizure of ballots and other election materials, the Justice Department in April obtained a grand jury subpoena relating to the names and personal contact information of Fulton County employees and volunteers involved in the 2020 election. Fulton County filed a motion Monday to quash the subpoena, arguing that it is too broad and aimed at harassing the president’s political opponents.

The Trump administration has also taken steps to obtain past election records from other critical swing states. The FBI used a subpoena in March to obtain records related to an audit of the 2020 presidential election in Arizona’s Maricopa County. And the Justice Department in April demanded that Wayne County, Michigan, turn in its ballots for the 2024 election.

The Justice Department is also fighting many states in court over access to voter data that includes sensitive personal information. Election officials, including some Republicans, have said transmitting that information would violate state and federal privacy laws.

Democrats have raised concerns that the Trump administration is using federal law enforcement as a weapon to address the president’s personal grievances and is considering ways to interfere in this year’s midterm elections. The Trump administration has said it is investigating allegations of past problems and seeking to protect future elections.

At a March 27 hearing on Fulton County’s request that the FBI return its ballots and other documents, the county’s attorneys argued that the seizure was improper and unjustified and demonstrated “total disregard” for the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. They suggested that the Trump administration decided to use a criminal search warrant to obtain the documents because it was tired of waiting for the outcome of the civil lawsuit filed by the Justice Department to obtain them last year.

Justice Department lawyers argued they took the appropriate steps to obtain a warrant and then retrieve the documents. They said it was not uncommon for parallel civil and criminal investigations to take place at the same time.