Fulton County challenges DOJ subpoena targeting 2020 election workers
The Fulton County court in Atlanta, Georgia, US, on Monday, Feb. 13, 2023 (Dustin Chambers/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(FULTON COUNTY, Ga.) — The Department of Justice last month demanded the names and contact information for every election worker in Fulton County, Georgia, involved in the 2020 election, according to court filings disclosed this week.
The Fulton County Board of Registrations and Elections is now asking a federal court in Atlanta to quash the grand jury subpoena from federal agents, which requested the names, addresses, phone numbers and emails for any staff member who worked the 2020 election.
“Its purpose is to target, harass, and punish the President’s perceived political opponents; it is grossly overbroad and untethered to any reasonable need; it cannot yield any evidence that could result in a criminal prosecution,” lawyers for the Fulton County officials said in the motion filed Monday with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
The subpoena appears to escalate the Trump administration’s pressure on Fulton County amid an ongoing federal investigation into purported irregulates in the 2020 election.
Driven in part by Trump allies who unsuccessfully sought to use debunked theories to overturn the election, federal agents in January seized all the ballots and records from the 2020 election.
For months, Fulton County officials have urged a federal judge to order the records be returned, though that judge has not yet issued a ruling.
DOJ attorneys have insisted that the search was based on evidence of potential misconduct and accused Fulton County officials of speculating about “some kind of grand conspiracy.”
In the motion filed on Monday, lawyers for Fulton County called the recent subpoena the “latest effort to target and harass the President’s perceived political enemies.” They argue that the statute of limitations for any alleged crime has run out and that the investigation lacks a legitimate basis.
“Grand juries do not exist to conduct roving inquiries untethered to a prosecutable criminal case,” the motion said.
Robb Pitts, the chairman of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, described the subpoena as an “outrageous federal overreach designed to intimidate and to chill participation in elections” in a statement.
The DOJ did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment.
US President Donald Trump arrives for a medal of honor ceremony in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Monday, March 2, 2026. President Trump is awarding the Medal of Honor to three US Army soldiers. (Photographer: Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Tuesday denied that Israel forced his hand into attacking Iran, and in another new explanation, said he ordered the U.S. strike on Iran because he concluded Tehran was going to attack the U.S. first after negotiations stalled.
Trump also acknowledged most of the individuals the U.S. favored to next lead in Tehran have been killed, including some in a new strike on Tuesday.
Hosting German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in the Oval Office, Trump for the first time took questions in public on the war, now in its fourth day and expanding throughout the Middle East.
Amid scrutiny over why the U.S. military campaign against Iran was necessary, and mixed messages from the administration, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters on Monday that the strikes were triggered in part because the U.S. knew Israel was going to attack Iran and Iran would retaliate.
“Did [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu pull the United States into this war?” ABC News Senior Political Correspondent Rachel Scott asked Trump on Tuesday.
“No. I might have forced their hand,” Trump replied. “You see, we were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first. They were going to attack. If we didn’t do it, they were going to attack first. I felt strongly about that.”
“Based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they were going to attack first. And I didn’t want that to happen. So, if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand. But Israel was ready and we were ready,” Trump continued, appearing to contradict Rubio.
Rubio also told reporters Monday that, despite his comments, Israel didn’t force Trump’s hand. House Speaker Mike Johnson, after a Gang of 8 briefing on Capitol Hill on Monday, said Israel was determined to act “with or without the U.S.”
Trump did not provide evidence for why his administration believed Iran posed an imminent threat to the U.S. Previously, American intelligence agencies had found Iran would not have had missiles capable of reaching the U.S. for another nine years, until 2035.
Trump said most of Iran’s military infrastructure, including its navy and air force, has been “knocked out.”
“We’re hitting them very hard,” Trump said, later adding: “They’re going to be in for a lot of hurt.”
On what’s next for Iran and who America would like to see take over, Trump admitted most of the individuals identified to potentially replace Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei have also been killed.
“Most of the people we had in mind are dead … And now we have another group, they may be dead also based on reports,” Trump said. “So, I guess you have a third wave coming in pretty soon. We’re not going to know anybody.”
“I guess the worst case would be we do this and then somebody takes over who’s as bad as the previous person,” Trump said. “That could happen.”
Trump also poured cold water on the idea of Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince of Iran, being an option to lead the country.
“Some people like him, and we haven’t been thinking about too much about that. It would seem to me that somebody from within maybe would be more appropriate,” Trump said. “I’ve said that he looks like a very nice person. but it would seem to me that somebody that’s there that’s currently popular if there is such a person.”
Meanwhile, the war is widening in the Middle East as Iran seeks retaliation for the U.S. and Israeli attacks. Tehran has struck nearly a dozen countries in the region, which Trump said he was “surprised” by.
“They hit countries that had nothing to do with what’s going on,” Trump said, criticizing Iran for striking civilian infrastructure like hotels.
The State Department has warned U.S. citizens to leave the region and closed several embassies. So far, six U.S. service members have died in the war and more have been wounded, according to U.S. officials.
ABC News White House Correspondent Karen Travers pressed Trump on the Americans who are currently stranded in the Middle East and why there wasn’t an evacuation plan to get them out. The president said because it “happened all very quickly.”
“I thought we were going to have a situation where we were going to be attacked. They were getting ready to attack Israel. They were getting ready to attack others,” he said.
The State Department later said it was working on securing military aircraft and charter flights for Americans who want to evacuate.
As for further impacts on Americans, Trump said oil prices could likely rise temporarily as the conflict plays out.
“People felt that it’s something that had to be done. So, if we have a little high oil prices for a little while, but as soon as this ends, those prices are going to drop, I believe, lower than even before,” Trump said.
In the Oval Office, President Trump also notably took aim at several European allies who he said have not supported his administration’s strikes on Iran.
“This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with,” Trump said as he rebuked British Prime Minister Keir Starmer for initially not letting U.S. aircraft to use the Diego Garcia base that the U.K. controls.
Trump also threatened to cut off all trade with Spain after the country said the U.S. cannot use its joint military bases for operations against Iran.
Germany’s Merz said he would speak with Trump about the “day after” in Iran.
“We are on the same page in terms of getting this terrible regime in Tehran away,” Merz said.
Earlier Tuesday, Trump posted on social media that it is “too late” for talks with Iran and warned the U.S. has enough weapons to fight “forever.”
“Wars can be fought ‘forever,’ and very successfully, using just these supplies,” Trump wrote in a social media post, despite having said on Monday that the U.S. would “easily prevail” in the conflict and campaigning in opposition to prolonged foreign entanglements.
The president has said the war with Iran could last for several weeks.
ABC News’ Karen Travers contributed to this report.
ICE agents leave a residence after knocking on the door on January 28, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security continues its immigration enforcement operations after two high-profile killings by federal agents in recent weeks. (Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — In the weeks after federal agents killed two U.S. citizens in Minnesota during a surge to apprehend undocumented immigrants for deportation, Americans oppose Immigration and Customs Enforcement tactics by wide margins and President Donald Trump’s approval on immigration has dipped to the lowest of his second term, according to an ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll conducted using Ipsos’ KnowledgePanel.
Trump’s immigration rating hits new low for second term
Trump, who has focused much of his second term on the immigration crackdown, is now 18 percentage points underwater in how Americans rate his handling of immigration — with 58% disapproving and 40% approving — the worst ratings he has had on immigration in his second term, ticking down from his October ratings and almost exactly where he was in July 2019 when 40% approved and 57% disapproved of how he was handling the issue.
Despite his increasingly negative ratings on handling immigration since taking office, Americans don’t trust Democrats to handle the issue more. When asked who they trust to do a better job handling immigration, 38% say they trust Trump more, 34% trust congressional Democrats more and 24% trust neither.
And even though he’s underwater on handling immigration overall, Trump’s ratings on handling the immigration situation at the U.S.-Mexico border are a bit better, albeit still slightly negative, with 47% of Americans approving of how he is handling the situation at the border and 50% disapproving.
Americans on deportations and ICE
Americans are roughly split over whether the federal government should deport all undocumented immigrants living in the United States, but a growing share oppose expanded ICE operations — and by a 2-to-1 margin, they oppose ICE’s tactics.
The results come following the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, an ICU nurse, by federal agents in Minneapolis on Jan. 24 — just weeks after the fatal shooting of Renee Good, a mother of three, by an ICE agent in Minneapolis on Jan. 7.
Half (50%) of Americans support the federal government deporting the about 14 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. and sending them back to their home countries while 48% oppose this.
Support was even higher for deporting all undocumented immigrants ahead of the 2024 presidential election, when 56% of Americans supported sending all undocumented immigrants to their home countries. By last February that dipped to 51%.
Most Hispanic (64%), Black (58%) and Asian and Pacific Islander Americans (56%) oppose deporting all undocumented immigrants while 58% of white people support widespread deportation.
Even if many Americans want mass deportations, 58% say Trump is going “too far” in deporting undocumented immigrants, up from 50% who said the same in October. Just 12% say he is “not going far enough” and 28% say he is “handling it about right.”
Seven in 10 Americans do not think most immigrants deported since January 2025 were violent criminals, including 33% who say “hardly any” of those deported were. Only 7% of Americans say “nearly all” of the immigrants who were deported since the beginning of the Trump administration were violent criminals.
A slim majority of Americans oppose ICE’s expanded operations to detain and deport undocumented immigrants in the U.S., 53% now, up from 46% in October.
Opinion breaks down on partisan lines, with 88% of Democrats opposed to ICE’s expanded operations and 81% of Republicans in support. A 56% majority of independents oppose ICE’s expanded operations.
By a 2-to-1 margin, Americans oppose the tactics ICE is using to enforce immigration laws, 62% to 31%. Half of Americans strongly oppose ICE’s tactics, including 89% of Democrats and 53% of independents. Only 4 in 10 Republicans strongly support the tactics ICE is using to enforce immigration law, rising to over half among MAGA Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who call themselves MAGA.
By a 13-point margin, Americans oppose abolishing ICE, 50% to 37%. Opinions are polarized: 7 in 10 Democrats support abolishing ICE, while 8 in 10 Republicans oppose it. More independents oppose abolishing ICE (45%) than support abolishing ICE (35%), with 2 in 10 independents saying they have no opinion on the issue.
ICE was established in 2003 as part of the Homeland Security Act following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Previously, the Immigration and Naturalization Service under the Justice Department administered immigration laws. The Abolish ICE political movement gained national attention in 2018 during the previous Trump administration’s family-separation policy.
An ICE memo issued in May gave federal agents the authority to enter the homes of people suspected of being in the U.S. illegally without warrants signed by judges. A wide majority of Americans — including majorities across party lines — say that when federal law enforcement wants to forcibly enter someone’s home, they need to get approval from a judge; just 20% say getting approval from a federal agency is enough.
How Americans feel about Minnesota and personal impacts
Most Americans (54%) say they are either upset (17%) or angry (37%) over how immigration enforcement has gone in Minnesota, with 72% of Democrats saying they are angry. More than 4 in 10 Americans say they are “not concerned” or “concerned but not upset” over the situation in Minnesota.
Nearly half of Republicans, 47%, say they are not concerned over immigration enforcement in Minnesota, along with 32% who say they are concerned but not upset.
And while majorities of Asian and Pacific Islander (66%), Hispanic (59%) and Black Americans (61%) say they are upset or angry about how immigration enforcement has gone in Minnesota, that dips to 49% among white people.
There is a personal connection for many Americans — 42% say they are at least somewhat concerned that federal immigration enforcement agents could arrest or detain someone they know, including 33% who say they are at least somewhat concerned this could happen to a close family member or friend.
Hispanic (60%), Black (55%) and Asian and Pacific Islander Americans (53%) are all more concerned that federal immigration agents could arrest and detain a close friend, family member or someone else they know than white people (32%).
Replacing Kristi Noem, sanctuary cities and the border
By almost a 2-to-1 margin, Americans support replacing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem amid the administration’s controversial immigration enforcement tactics, 44% to 23%, with 33% voicing no opinion on the matter.
Democrats are more aligned on replacing Noem than Republicans are. Three-quarters of Democrats support removing Noem, 7% oppose it and 18% have no opinion. Among Republicans, 45% oppose replacing Noem, 15% support it and a large 40% say they have no opinion on the matter. Among independents, 45% support Noem’s removal, 17% oppose it and 38% have no opinion.
By an 8-point margin, Americans oppose denying federal funds to so-called sanctuary cities that limit their cooperation with ICE, 46% to 38%. Eight in 10 Democrats oppose this, over 7 in 10 Republicans support it.
Methodology — This ABC News-Washington Post-Ipsos poll was conducted via the probability-based Ipsos KnowledgePanel, Feb. 12-17, 2026, among 2,589 U.S. adults and has an overall margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points. The error margins are larger among partisan group subsamples.
Nicole Saphier attends the Patriot Awards, December 5, 2024 in Greenvale, New York. (Theo Wargo/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump said on Thursday that he is nominating Dr. Nicole Saphier to be the next surgeon general.
Trump made the announcement on social media, calling Saphier a “STAR physician who has spent her career guiding women facing breast cancer through their diagnosis and treatment while tirelessly advocating to increase early cancer detection and prevention.”
Saphier is the director of breast imaging at Memorial Sloan Kettering Monmouth in New Jersey and a regular medical contributor on Fox News.
According to her profile on the Memorial Sloan Kettering website, she has experience “performing minimally invasive, image-guided procedures of the breast, kidney, pancreas, liver, thyroid and lymph nodes.”
Her nomination comes just two months after Trump’s previous nominee, Dr. Casey Means, appeared before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) committee for her confirmation hearing.
During the hearing, Means indicated she supports vaccines but stopped short of recommending certain shots.
Means, who has a medical degree but does not hold an active medical license, appeared hesitant to say that some vaccines, such as the flu vaccine, prevent serious disease.
Sen. Bill Cassidy, who chairs the HELP committee and is a physician, noted that two children died last year from measles and pushed Means on whether she would encourage parents to vaccinate their children with the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine.
Means initially stressed personal autonomy and responded that she supported vaccination and that every patient should have a conversation with their doctor about getting vaccinated.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
