A federal judge has rejected a U.S. Department of Justice attempt to obtain the names and personal contact information of individuals who worked during the 2020 election in Georgia's Fulton County. The ruling on Tuesday by U.S. District Judge William Ray found the subpoena to be "unreasonable and must be quashed."
The Justice Department had issued a grand jury subpoena in April seeking the contact details of county employees and volunteer poll workers. This action was seen by Fulton County as an attempt to "target, harass and punish the President's perceived political opponents" and was described as "grossly overbroad and untethered to any reasonable need."
Judge Ray echoed concerns about the scope of the subpoena, stating that while grand juries assist federal prosecutors in investigations, "that does not give the DOJ the right to use the Grand Jury to do whatever the DOJ wants." He determined that the information sought had "low need" and was "highly burdensome" to disclose.
Furthermore, the judge noted that even if the obtained records could aid in identifying individuals who might support theories of an unfair election, the information could not be used to bring charges. "The statute of limitations for any possible crime arising from the 2020 Election has long expired," Ray wrote.
The subpoena followed an FBI search warrant executed in January at the Fulton County election hub, where hundreds of boxes of ballots and other election-related documents from 2020 were seized. A prior request by the county to compel the federal government to return these ballots was denied by a federal judge in May.
In its court filing, the Justice Department argued the subpoena was a standard investigative step to "identify persons with relevant knowledge." However, Kamal Ghali, a lawyer for Fulton County, contended that the subpoena would "chill participation by election workers" and that the statute of limitations had already passed.
Arguing for the Justice Department, lawyer William McComb stated that the statute of limitations was not relevant at the investigative stage, as the purpose of the investigation is to determine what charges, if any, can be brought. He explained that obtaining the contact information was intended to "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, Judge Ray had signaled his focus on the reasonableness of the request, noting the danger of an "overly broad fishing expedition."