To handle elections, members of the election committee are chosen. As part of that employment, Julie Adams, a part of Fulton County, Georgia’s elections table, asked for access to vote data before certifying the results of the state’s March national preference primary. According to Adams, the elections producer refused to provide that knowledge, but without all those statistics in front of her, Adams did not vote to confirm the poll.
Adams and the rest of the table were informed ten days later by the Democratic Party of Georgia in a letter that threatened her with legal fees if she made her choice.
Adams and other board members were advised to “approve documentation of Fulton County’s election outcomes going forth, and particularly for the remaining votes that will be held in 2024, to avoid needless legal problems and issues.”
Adams argued in a problem that she had the right to withhold documentation of an vote when she had not been given access to election data and materials necessary to perform her certification duties. She also requested emergency relief.
Filed the day after Georgia’s May key, Adam’s complaint urged the court to principle fast that, “based on her present lack of access to Election Materials and Processes, Plaintiff will be unable to fulfil her legal duties to certify the accuracy of the May 21, 2024, Major Election”. With the situation also unanswered, Adams declined to confirm the May vote.
The Fulton County judges have kept the situation in limbo, maybe through the November vote, rather than dispelling the myth that an elected official could face legal action for exercising her appointed place.
Georgians mind to the polls for the major political preference.
On March 12, Georgia held its main for political choice.
Five days before the choice key, Adams requested the eligible voter listing, the voter check-in list, drop-box ballot recap sheets, and another election-related documentation she said she needed to fulfill her duties before certifying an election, according to her complaint. The complaint further alleges that Nadine Williams, the election director, informed Adams the same evening that the majority of the requested documentation would n’t be accessible until after the election itself, but that “review of these documents is not required for certification.”
On March 19, having not received any of the requested documentation, Adams voted not to certify the results of the election. The Democratic Party of Georgia wrote to Adams and the other four Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections members ten days later, claiming that certifying an election is merely a “ministerial” task and that refusing to do so could lead to criminal prosecution.
” Ultimately, if a member of the Board of Elections either ‘ willfully neglects’ or’ refuses to perform’ their statutory obligations, they’ shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,'” the letter warned, citing O. C. G. A. § 21-2-596.
What’s the Point of a Board with No Discretion?
Judge Ural Glanville of the Fulton County’s Superior Court suspended from Adams ‘ complaint in June, and the case has not yet been reassigned. The court has a straightforward question. Is Adams ‘ mandate discretionary, meaning she and other members are elected to evaluate an election, to certify its outcomes when they are confident that it was conducted legally, and to withhold certification when they are not? Or is it ministerial, meaning that she and other members are required to rigorously confirm an election’s outcome regardless of their concerns for the administration?
Georgia Democrats, reflecting a nationwide push by Democrats to neuter local election boards, seek to redefine Adams ‘ role as the latter. Adams, however, insists that she did so.
The Board of Registration and Elections ( BRE ) has the authority to “use the powers and duties of the election superintendent relating to the conduct of primaries and elections,” according to Adams ‘ complaint.
“]T] he statutory role of election superintendent assigned to the BRE by Georgia law cannot be delegated in its entirety]away from the board and ] to the Director” of elections Nadine Williams, the complaint reads, arguing that the” Plaintiff’s duties are, in fact, discretionary”.
Some of the “powers and duties” outlined for the superintendent, under state statute, include the power to “inspect systematically and thoroughly the conduct of primaries and elections … to the end that primaries and elections may be honestly, efficiently, and uniformly conducted”. One way to carry out the duty of” computation, canvassing, tabulating, and certification”, as the suit notes, includes the superintendent comparing” the registration figure with the certificates returned by the poll officers”.
The complaint also makes reference to Fulton County Local Act 14-32,” c] in accordance with the Authorizations Act, which gives the BRE the “powers and duties relating to the registration of voters and absentee balloting procedures.”
However, Williams allegedly told Adams that “her requests for supporting documentation regarding election results are unnecessary because the Director’s summaries are subject to a “rigid validation process” and should simply be trusted, as the complaint claims in the complaint.”
In the March preference primary, the complaint continues that” Plaintiff voted against the certification of election results without having the ability to verify the accuracy of the returns and observe and inspect the various election processes in Fulton County.”
What’s Next?
The Fulton County judiciary has failed to give elected officials any assurance that they can carry out their duties as they please without fear of the prosecutions that Georgia Democrats are threatening by slow-walking Adams ‘ case. Unresolved, the problem almost certainly will have a chilling impact on election officials who may be concerned about the Nov. 5 election’s certification.
The Georgia State Elections Board recently criticized Fulton County in particular for breaking the law during the 2020 election after it discovered that more than 3, 000 ballots were re-scanned twice during the recount. Two Republican members of the Fulton County Elections Board at the time did not vote to certify the election, as explained by The Federalist’s Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway in her best-seller Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections. The county was also reprimanded after it failed to count 1, 326 votes during the 2022 primary. The county fixed the error and the election was “recertified”, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Georgia’s State Election Board ruled on Tuesday that county election board members have a right to a “reasonable inquiry” into election irregularities before certifying the results of an election by a 3-2 vote. Does this rule have an impact on Adams ‘ case?
Williams claimed that the county does n’t” comment on matters pending litigation.”
The Federalist’s election correspondent, Brianna Lyman. With a degree in international political economy, Brianna received her degree from Fordham University. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2
