A Georgia judge is considering a lawsuit brought by State and national Democrats against the GOP-controlled Georgia State Election Board over a pair of rules passed in August. These rules require county election officials to conduct a “reasonable inquiry” into election results before certifying them and allow them to examine all election-related documentation prior to certification. The judge has expressed concerns about the vagueness of the “reasonable inquiry” rule and the timing of changing election rules so close to the upcoming election. Democrats argue that the new rules will introduce chaos into the certification process, while Republicans defend them as necessary and within their authority.
The judge raised concerns about the Supreme Court’s precedent against changing rules on the eve of an election in the Purcell v. Gonzalez case, which makes it difficult for courts to intervene in cases like this. However, he also noted the problematic situation where unreviewable rules can be issued if they fall within this window. Last month, three Trump allies on the board approved a rule requiring hand-counting of ballots at polling places, prompting Democrats to sue to block the rule. The judge seemed to agree that clarity is needed for the “reasonable inquiry” rule but saw no issue with the “examination rule” as it permits access but does not obligate anyone to take specific actions.
The case is significant due to concerns that the new rules will create chaos in the critical battleground state of Georgia in the days following the election when county officials must certify results by November 12. Both Democrats and Republicans are likely to appeal any adverse ruling, adding to the complexity of the situation. The lawsuit is backed by Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign, reflecting concerns over attempts to subvert the election results by Trump and his allies if he loses Georgia again. The Democrats argue that the new rules conflict with state law and give excessive authority to delay or refuse certification based on alleged irregularities, shifting responsibility from state courts to local officials.
The plaintiffs are seeking a ruling confirming the mandatory duty of county superintendents to certify election results by the statutory deadline and invalidating the new rules if they conflict with state law. Republicans argue there is no live controversy for the court to resolve and that the Democrats’ concerns are speculative future contingencies. The judge’s decision is crucial in determining the impact of the new rules on the certification process and the potential for chaos in the aftermath of the election. The outcome of this case will have broader implications for election procedures and oversight in Georgia and may set a precedent for similar challenges in other states.
