Ballot Seizures Across Multiple States

In 2024, authorities began seizing ballots from prior elections in several states. In January, FBI agents executed a warrant at an election facility in Fulton County, Georgia, confiscating 600 boxes of 2020 ballots. In March, the Department of Justice obtained digital images of 2020 ballots from Maricopa County, Arizona, and subpoenaed physical ballots from the 2024 election in Wayne County, Michigan. That same month, a Republican sheriff in California secured a warrant to seize roughly 650,000 ballots cast in the November statewide redistricting election, announcing a recount without clear authority.

Wired Magazine

The seizures follow persistent claims, promoted by former President Donald Trump and allies, that the 2020 election was stolen. Those allegations have driven the Justice Department to seek evidence of alleged irregularities despite repeated judicial rejections of fraud theories. Legal scholars warn that repeated ballot-seizure actions could set a precedent for federal or local officials to intervene in election processes without clear statutory authority, potentially destabilizing vote-counting operations and eroding public confidence ahead of the 2024 midterms.

Wired Magazine

Gowri Ramachandran, director of elections and security at the Brennan Center for Justice, warned that courts and grand juries must not allow ballot-seizure actions to become routine precedent. Anna Baldwin, director of voting-rights litigation at the Campaign Legal Center, described the moves as a potential “dry run” that could enable election-denial officials to misuse federal power. The Justice Department has framed its requests as investigations into alleged fraud in past elections.

Wired Magazine

Election experts contend the seizures appear politically motivated, aiming to validate former President Trump’s fraud narrative or to intimidate election officials. The California sheriff’s warrant to seize 650,000 ballots lacks a clear statutory basis, and the Justice Department’s subpoena for Wayne County ballots provides no public justification. No official response from the DOJ or the sheriff’s office has been offered, leaving a transparency gap about the legal authority for these actions.

Wired Magazine

• “It’s really important for the public, for grand juries, for judges to not allow these actions … to become some kind of precedent,” — Gowri Ramachandran, Director of Elections and Security, Brennan Center for Justice

Wired Magazine

• “There is understandable concern that this is a dry run for going after ballot seizures in an ongoing election,” — Anna Baldwin, Director of Voting Rights Litigation, Campaign Legal Center

Wired Magazine

As the November 2024 midterms approach, courts are expected to hear challenges to the ballot-seizure orders. Election officials in the affected states have signaled intent to contest the warrants, while watchdog groups plan to monitor any further federal or local attempts to obtain historic ballots.

Wired Magazine