ATLANTA — A federal judge ruled Tuesday that the US Department of Justice is not entitled to obtain the names and personal contact details of everyone who worked on the 2020 election in Fulton County, Georgia.
In April, the Justice Department secured a grand jury subpoena requesting identifying information and contact details for county staff members and volunteer poll workers. President Donald Trump has repeatedly alleged, without evidence, that widespread voter fraud in Fulton County — Georgia’s largest county and a Democratic bastion — deprived him of winning the state in 2020.
Fulton County moved to have the subpoena thrown out, contending that it was designed to “target, harass and punish the President’s perceived political opponents” and calling it “grossly overbroad and untethered to any reasonable need.”
“Given the low need for the subpoenaed information and the highly burdensome nature of the disclosure of the same, the Subpoena is unreasonable and must be quashed,” US District Judge William Ray wrote in the decision.
Ray noted that although grand juries regularly assist federal prosecutors in probing potential crimes, “that does not give the DOJ the right to use the Grand Jury to do whatever the DOJ wants.”
The judge also wrote that even if the Justice Department’s requested records could identify county election workers who might support claims that the 2020 election was unfair, the material could not be used to bring charges.
“That is because the statute of limitations for any possible crime arising from the 2020 Election has long expired,” Ray wrote.
RELATED: Belgium Issue Angry Statement Over Controversial Balogun Red Card Decision
The subpoena followed a January FBI search warrant at Fulton County’s election hub, where agents seized hundreds of boxes containing 2020 ballots and other election-related documents. In May, a federal judge rejected the county’s request to compel the federal government to return the ballots.
The Justice Department argued in a court filing that the subpoena was the “next step in the normal investigative process” and that it seeks “records identifying persons with relevant knowledge.”
Kamal Ghali, a lawyer for the county, argued that the subpoena “will chill participation by election workers” and that the statute of limitations for any of the alleged misconduct had already lapsed.
Justice Department lawyer William McComb said the statute of limitations issue is not relevant at the investigative stage. The point of the investigation is to figure out what charges can be brought, he said.
“My point is, as we sit here now, we are not sure what charges can be brought. That’s the whole point of the investigation,” he said.
The request for election workers’ contact information, McComb said, “would simply be a pathway to determine and speak with and interview certain individuals who worked at the polls who may have seen, heard or done something in and of themselves.”
During a hearing in May, the judge said he was going to focus on whether the federal government’s request for the election worker contact information was reasonable.
“You know, an overly broad fishing expedition is bad and is not allowed,” Ray said. “But one that’s not overly broad is kind of okay. And the question is, how do we — how does — how do I as a judge decide when does it go too far?”
