Justice Department Probe of 2020 Election Gets First Public Court Test
Judge hears arguments on whether Fulton County must return 2020 ballots that FBI seized in January 2026.
Objective Facts
On Friday, March 27, Fulton County's attorney Abbe Lowell told Georgia Northern District Judge JP Boulee that if he did not scrutinize the criminal search warrant used to obtain 2020 Atlanta-area election records, it could embolden the Trump administration to seize ballots in future elections. The warrant was sought by US Attorney Tom Albus, serving as "special attorney" to investigate election issues nationwide, based on a referral from Kurt Olsen, a lawyer involved in Trump's schemes to overturn the 2020 election, now serving as White House director of election security and integrity. The Justice Department says it is investigating supposed discrepancies in the county's records of scanned ballot images, alleged "irregularities" in the tabulator tapes, and claims that some absentee ballots were suspect because they didn't have fold marks. The county put on the stand Ryan Macias, a longtime election expert, who testified the affidavit used to obtain the warrant included "incoherent," "contradictory," and inaccurate descriptions of how the election was carried. Judge Boulee signaled sympathy to the Justice Department's arguments that its criminal investigations were entitled to broad latitude, but also said that he was bothered by some aspects of the search warrant.
Left-Leaning Perspective
Leading elections expert Ryan Macias testified to a federal judge on Friday that the evidence the FBI used to justify seizing 2020 election ballots from Fulton County "doesn't make sense," saying the list of irregularities didn't represent a crime and the witnesses appeared misinformed. The probe originated from Kurt Olsen, a lawyer who was involved in Trump's schemes to overturn the 2020 election and is now the White House's director of election security and integrity. Expert testimony suggests the justification cited by the Trump administration official to obtain the warrant had "no basis in reality." Fulton County officials argue the investigation focuses on "human errors that its own sources confirm occur in almost every election ... without any intentional wrongdoing whatsoever," and the statute of limitations for the two laws cited in the warrant have already run out, suggesting a fishing expedition. The Affidavit omits numerous material facts confirming the alleged conduct was previously investigated and found to be unintentional. The affidavit overwhelmingly recycles old claims about voting irregularities that have either been debunked or haven't gone anywhere, relies heavily on information from prominent election-deniers whose claims have failed to produce voter-fraud evidence, and cites no evidence of any actual criminal intent. The FBI's move has alarmed Democrats and many election officials concerned it's using law enforcement to pursue the president's personal grievances and planning ways to interfere in 2026 midterm elections, as the FBI also used a subpoena to obtain records related to an audit of the 2020 election in Maricopa County in Arizona. A ruling returning the ballots would still leave unanswered how a warrant so fundamentally flawed—built on stretched legal theories and cherry-picked facts—cleared internal Justice Department review. Courts can return ballots, but they cannot return confidence in the institutions that tried to take them.
Right-Leaning Perspective
The DOJ adhered to normal procedures for getting the search warrant and there is no conceivable way to conclude there was callous disregard for the plaintiff's rights because the clerk's office has no constitutional rights, and the DOJ adhered to normal procedures. Justice Department attorneys argued that preparing a detailed affidavit and presenting it to a judge shows they clearly didn't show "callous disregard" for constitutional rights, and the county is just upset that the documents were taken. The Justice Department argued that if the judge were to side with Fulton County's request, it would "open the floodgates to parties who" would use similar challenges to search warrants "as a way to get a sneak peek at ongoing criminal investigations." The broader legal fight comes amid heightened scrutiny of the Trump administration's efforts to revisit aspects of the 2020 election, with the FBI having issued subpoenas for election-related records in other battleground states like Arizona, while the Justice Department pursues voter data from multiple states in ongoing litigation. The inquiry was initiated following a referral led by attorney Kurt Olsen, who now serves as Trump's director of election security and integrity, and the affidavit relied on claims about the election's conduct by 11 witnesses. The Justice Department is investigating "irregularities that occurred during the 2020 presidential election in the County" and identified two laws that might have been violated—one requires election records to be maintained for 22 months, the other prohibits procuring, casting or tabulating false ballots—and a magistrate judge reviewed the FBI affidavit and signed off on the search warrant. Trump and his lawyers have continued to cite Moncla's claims about election fraud in Fulton County even as unsavory incidents in his past have surfaced, though even a lawyer for the conservative Gateway Pundit called Moncla "a goddamned fraud" and "a known fabricator." Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani was ordered to pay around $150 million for repeating related discredited claims against election workers. Right-leaning voices emphasize legitimate election concerns rather than debunked fraud theories.
Deep Dive
On January 28, 2026, FBI agents executed a search warrant at the Fulton County Elections Hub and Operations Center in Union City, seizing hundreds of boxes of ballots, voter rolls, ballot images and other records from the 2020 election. The FBI's unprecedented seizure of 2020 election ballots in the county in January 2026 has further inflamed fears of federal interference in the upcoming 2026 midterm elections. The raid comes amid an ongoing federal probe of the 2020 election in Georgia, directed by Trump. A DOJ official explained to Steve Bannon that although the White House had given Olsen the official mandate to reinvestigate the 2020 election, "inside DOJ, myself and a couple of others have been working also on the same topic" — including getting the Fulton County ballots, and agreed: "Look, we've got to get" the ballots. While certain aspects of Fulton County's election administration were not perfect, there has been no proof offered of widespread fraud. Dozens of lawsuits from Trump's campaign and allies failed after the 2020 election, and it's never been demonstrated that any of the problems owed to anything other than human or administrative errors, which in this context, usually aren't treated as crimes. Witness 2 is described as an "obstetrician" and "Republican-appointed member of the Georgia State Election Board," Janice Johnston, appointed in March 2022, who has promoted election conspiracies. The affidavit also mentions evidence collected by Clay Parikh, a cybersecurity specialist with ties to MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, who is currently working as a special government employee. Kurt Olsen spoke on the phone with Trump at least three times on January 6, 2021. The March 27 hearing revealed a fundamental disagreement over whether the affidavit contains new, compelling evidence or recycled, debunked claims. Election expert testimony stated that the witnesses the FBI cited "use contradictory terminology and it represents a misunderstanding of how elections work," with "no basis in reality for most of the witness statements." However, Judge Boulee signaled sympathy to the Justice Department's arguments that its criminal investigations were entitled to broad latitude, but also said that he was bothered by some aspects of the search warrant. The judge has not yet ruled, leaving unresolved whether federal law enforcement can seize ballots based on theories already thoroughly investigated and rejected, and what safeguards exist if such seizures expand to other jurisdictions during election years.