A federal judge has denied a request by President Donald Trump’s administration to cancel an evidentiary hearing in a case involving the seizure of 2020 election records in Atlanta, according to court filings.
In a court order issued March 20, 2026, Judge Jeffrey P. Boulee of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ruled that factual disputes surrounding the seizure require further examination in court.
Local officials in Fulton County asked the court to return the seized records, saying they have a legal interest in the materials and that their removal has interfered with official duties.
The Seizure of Records
The dispute centers on the Trump administration directing the FBI to seize roughly 700 boxes of 2020 election records in Fulton County, including ballots and other documents, during a search at a major Atlanta election facility. The presence at the raid of Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, and the seizure itself sparked widespread criticism from Democrats and local leaders, who viewed the move as politically motivated.
Government lawyers had asked the court to cancel the planned evidentiary hearing, arguing that the petitioners lack a sufficient legal interest in the records and that holding a hearing could interfere with an ongoing federal investigation, according to court filings. They also contended that the existence of a judicially approved search warrant should limit further scrutiny.
The court rejected those arguments, finding that at least one petitioner, Fulton County’s clerk, had lawful possession of the records at the time they were seized, satisfying the requirement to bring the motion. The judge also held that the existence of a warrant does not automatically preclude judicial review of how the search was conducted.
Facts in Dispute
The court found that important facts are still in dispute, such as whether the evidence used to get the warrant was trustworthy and whether any information was left out. Under Rule 41(g), the court must review this evidence before making a final decision.
The judge further declined to accept the government’s position that a hearing would improperly interfere with an ongoing investigation, noting that courts have historically considered similar motions even while investigations are active. An evidentiary hearing is a court proceeding where a judge hears testimony and reviews evidence to resolve disputed facts before making a decision.
The ruling does not resolve whether the records will be returned, but ensures that an evidentiary hearing will proceed, where both sides can present testimony and evidence.
Fulton County, which includes the city of Atlanta and delivered Joe Biden a decisive victory in the 2020 election, has become a frequent target of President Trump and his allies, as well as of Republican claims of election irregularities. Claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election have been repeatedly debunked, with no credible evidence showing the outcome was stolen.
Gabbard Questioned
At a Senate hearing on Wednesday, Mark Warner questioned Gabbard about her presence during the FBI’s seizure of election records in Fulton County, noting that her role traditionally concerns foreign intelligence and that the warrant did not reference any foreign involvement. Pressed on her authority, Gabbard said her office has “purview” over law enforcement agencies but maintained that she “did not participate in a law enforcement activity.”
Confronted with reports and images showing her at the scene, she said she attended at the request of Donald Trump to observe the operation, an explanation that appeared to contradict Trump’s earlier statement that she had been directed by Pam Bondi. The precise reason for her presence remains unclear.
Read the full article here
