Fulton County Judge Robert McBurney sided with the Election Board and ruled that the county must turn over documents to the board, including scanned ballot images from the 2020 election, immediately.
Executive summary
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney ruled in December 2025 that the Georgia State Election Board may obtain 2020 ballots and related records from Fulton County, and several local outlets reported he ordered those materials — including digital scanned images — to be turned over immediately as part of an upheld subpoena [1] [2] [3]. The decision cleared a long-running fight over access to ballots, set the board on the hook for document costs estimated by the county, and landed amid admissions by Fulton officials about procedural lapses in 2020 that the board has seized on [4] [5] [2].
1. The judge’s order: what he actually did and how it’s been reported
Multiple local news organizations reported that Judge McBurney "cleared the way" for the State Election Board to obtain Fulton County’s 2020 ballot images and related documents, describing the ruling as an upholding of a subpoena that compels the county to produce physical ballots, stubs, envelopes and digital images [1] [5] [4]. Several outlets explicitly stated the judge “ruled that the county must turn over documents to the board, including scanned ballot images from the 2020 election, immediately,” framing the order as immediate production [2] [3]. Reporting is consistent across mainstream local outlets (AJC, FOX5, WRDW, WALB) that access was legally authorized and that the subpoena was sustained [1] [4] [3] [2].
2. Why the State Election Board wants the files: subpoena history and stated purpose
The State Election Board reopened an investigation into Fulton County’s handling of the 2020 election and issued a subpoena last year seeking paper ballots and digital ballot images among other records as part of that inquiry, which Judge McBurney’s decision allowed to proceed [4] [5] [1]. Coverage notes the subpoena was originally issued in 2024–2025 and has been the subject of litigation by Fulton County’s Board of Registration and Elections, meaning the ruling resolves a contested discovery fight rather than launching a brand new probe [5] [1].
3. The proximate trigger: Fulton’s admission about tabulator tapes and the scale involved
State reporting ties the board’s urgency to a county admission that tabulator tapes from the 2020 election were not properly signed — approximately 130 tapes representing roughly 315,000 early votes — a procedural violation under Georgia rules that requires poll managers and witnesses to sign tapes [2] [3] [6]. That admission, made by Fulton County attorney Ann Brumbaugh at a December 9 meeting of the Georgia Elections Board, has been cited repeatedly as a reason the board is seeking full access to ballots and images to verify chain-of-custody and tabulation integrity [2] [3] [6].
4. Costs, competing narratives and partisan framing
Judge McBurney’s decision also assigned the financial burden for producing the documents to the State Election Board, with the county estimating document costs around $400,000 — a fact reported broadly and used by various outlets to critique the fiscal and political dimensions of the dispute [5] [4] [7]. Alternative viewpoints are present in the record: Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger emphasized that all votes were verified with photo ID and argued a clerical error does not negate lawfully cast ballots, a stance quoted in mainstream reporting that counsels against conflating procedure with illegality [6]. Some partisan sites have seized on the ruling to make broader claims about widespread fraud; those outlets mix factual reporting of the subpoena with more speculative assertions that are not corroborated in mainstream accounts [7] [5].
5. Broader legal context and what comes next
This production order intersects with Judge McBurney’s prior rulings clarifying that county election boards must certify results and may not refuse certification, a judicial posture that frames McBurney as a central arbiter of Georgia election administration disputes [8] [9]. Practically, the ruling resolves a key procedural barrier to the State Election Board’s review, but the release of ballots and images can spawn further litigation over access conditions, redaction, chain-of-custody protocols and use of the materials in enforcement or referral actions — outcomes the reporting indicates parties and observers anticipate but that have not yet been litigated to finality in the sources provided [1] [4] [5].