Less than three weeks before the election day, a Georgia judge invalidated seven election integrity regulations that the State Election Board ( SEB ) had approved.
A series of ideas that were intended to maintain and assure election integrity and correct vote counts were deemed by Fulton County Judge Thomas Cox to be “lack legal authority to enact” a series of proposals. Cox argued that the state government has the authority to regulate elections, even though the SEB is in charge of “promulgating rules and regulations to encourage uniformity in vote practices, and to encourage legality and purity in elections.”
Other duties of the SEB include “developing rules and regulations about what constitutes a vote that will be counted,” as well as” taking such other actions as the table may deem appropriate to conduct “fair, legal and orderly primaries,” as the secretary of state’s office has stated.
According to Cox,” the issues presented are legitimate ones regarding whether SEB had the power to promulgate the rules in question and whether these guidelines are legally binding in illumination of the Georgia Constitution, the Election Code, and the U.S. Constitution.” Cox came to the conclusion that” the SEB lacks power to promulgate these challenged guidelines” and that” the SEB has no legal authority to promulgate these rules because the General Assembly did never provide’sufficient’ or’realistic’ parameters guiding the SEB’s rulemaking around.”
Former Democratic state senator Scot Turner, his business, Eternal Vigilance Action, and Chatham County election board part James Hall filed the lawsuit. The lawsuit claimed that the SEB “promulgated laws that violate the Election Code” and that it lacks the authority to make such modifications. The lawsuit contends that the impact of the SEB rules on the election would alter” Georgians ‘ voting rights, despite the fact that the SEB rules established safeguards to ensure accurate vote counts. The Democratic National Committee and the Georgia Democrat Party brought a related lawsuit.
Cox entirely struck down Rule 183-1-12-. 12 ( a ) ( 5 ), which made an effort to ensure that the number of physical ballots counted on Election Day matches the precinct level machine count total. This regulation would require” three sworn precinct poll officials to freely count the total number of ballots taken out of the sensor, sorting into stacks of 50 votes, and continuing until each of the three surveys officials has individually counted each of the vote.”
While Cox defended blocking the rule under the pretense that “every rule enacted by the SEB must be in line with the Existing Election Code,” SEB member Janelle King pointed out during a hearing on the idea that many Georgia counties now conduct ballot reconciliation manually and that this rule would merely serve to create standard guidance, as reportedly required by state statute.
” I just want to point out that the part of the [SEB] is part of our position,” King said, reading from what she said is state election code,” to promulgate rules and regulations to determine dress and nondiscriminatory standards.” ” Having some counties counting manually and some regions no, does not create uniformity,” as we have stated before. This concept may accomplish that, and we do indeed have the capacity to do so.”
In a previous judgement on Tuesday, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney argued that the rule’s change came very close to the election because it would only” confirm that the device counts match reality.” McBurney claimed that there would not be sufficient time to properly train poll staff. McBurney, but, in his Tuesday determination did state that the law “appears consistent with the SEB’s objective of ensuring fair, legal, and ordered elections”.
Left-wing media tries to make certified nothing more than a rubber stamp by violating GA election rules.
Cox voided Rule 183-1-12-. According to the “reasonable examination” law, which established that state election board users are entitled to a “reasonable investigation” into election irregularities before certifying the effects of an election, During the August reading on the rule, SEB part Janelle King stated that” by supporting this principle, we are saying that we stand with those who have to sign legal documents and make sure they have what’s necessary to support that constitutional report.”
A separate rule ( Rule 183-1-12-. 12 ), which in part made it possible for board members to review” all the election related documentation created during the course of elections prior to the certification of results,” was also rejected by Cox.
Notably, McBurney acknowledged that election superintendents ( those tasked with certifying the results of an election ) have a duty to look into any election discrepancies and are entitled to review election-related materials as part of this process in a decision on Monday that said election officials were required to certify election results even if the results showed “more votes than voters” or are “non-sensical”
Another rule that would require surveillance cameras at each drop box, a rule that would expand the area where poll watchers could be positioned, and a daily reporting rule, which as described by Cox, would expand the daily reporting ( already defined in Election Code ) to include weekend reporting, was further invalidated by Cox’s decision.
For more election news and updates, visit , electionbriefing.com.
Brianna Lyman is a correspondent for The Federalist on elections. 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