Federal judge dismisses lawsuit that challenged Georgia's electronic voting machine system
In Monday's ruling on Curling v Raffensperger, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Totenberg credited the plaintiff's role in providing evidence that exposed a major security breach of Georgia election equipment in Coffee County, pictured above, following the 2020 election. (File)
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging the security of Georgia's electronic voting machines even though the judge maintained substantial concerns about the system.
According to U.S. District Court Judge Amy Totenberg ruling issued Monday, the plaintiffs in Curling v Raffensperger are not able to demonstrate that the state's electronic voting system disenfranchises them from exercising their right to vote in elections.
She wrote that the election activists Coalition for Good Governance and Georgia voters lacked standing in the lawsuit.
Totenberg also wrote that some of the plaintiffs legal objections to the touchscreen ballot marking devices are more about policy disagreements rather than constitutional violations.
Totenberg, however, wrote that she has substantial concerns about the electronic voting technology that has long faced allegations about the risks of being hacked and potentially compromising elections in Georgia.
The state's electronic Dominion Voting Systems machines were rolled out statewide in 2019, but by that time the state was already involved in the pre-emptive federal court legal battle with the Coalition for Good Governance and other individual plaintiffs who claim that the electronic system is vulnerable to cyber attack and operational problems that violate voters' constitutional rights.
Totenberg credited the plaintiff's role in providing evidence that exposed a major breach of election equipment in Coffee County following the 2020 election.
Also, she cited a report by a University of Michigan expert on cyber security that detailed the potential threats to ballot marking devices, as well as the possibility that future elections could be compromised by unauthorized access to voter data.
Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger applauded Totenberg's ruling in the District Court for Northern District of Georgia case. Raffensperger has long defended the security of Dominion voting machines, arguing that there is no evidence of fraud affecting Georgia's 2020 and 2024 presidential election results.
'Today's ruling is just one more resounding vindication of Georgia's elections,' Raffensperger said. 'From day one, we knew these accusations were meritless. All the real-world evidence shows that Georgia's paper ballot system works well. Our local election officials are professionals. And the voters of this state know that their votes are counted securely, accurately, and quickly.'
The Coalition for Good Governance has long argued that Georgia elections should use hand-marked ballots, claiming that method is the safest way to vote.
The debate over electronic voting machines versus paper ballots was the focus of conspiracy theorists who blamed Dominion's system for Republican President Donald Trump's loss to Joe Biden in 2020. Conspiracies about the Dominion machines swirled after Fox News settled a lawsuit with the voting machine maker over the network's false reports about the system's reliability.
Over the last couple of years, a prominent pro-paper ballot movement has been led by VoterGa, a largely pro-Trump faction that has urged people to request that state officials get rid of the electronic voting system.
Totenberg wrote Monday that the case has led to some Georgia legislative action that assuaged some of her concerns, such as the Dominion machines relying on use of QR codes for counting votes on paper ballots, a practice that has been criticized by ballot security advocates.
Last year the Georgia Legislature approved Senate Bill 189, which calls for replacing the QR code by July 1, 2026 with a new method of either readable text or a bubble style mark similar to what is currently used for absentee and provisional ballots.
Next year, the paper ballots movement could gain traction in the Legislature through Senate Bill 214, which would allow Georgia voters to cast a hand-marked paper ballot at polling places during early voting and on Election Day. The measure, which was approved last week by a Senate Ethics Committee, would give voters the ability to cast their votes in polling places using pen or pencils, which can now be used to complete absentee ballots. This year is the first in a two-year cycle and bills that don't pass this year will be alive in 2026.
'Although the plaintiffs have not prevailed in this court of law, their advocacy has helped spark real legislative action,' Totenberg wrote.
'If (SB 189) legislative measures are ultimately funded and implemented, they are the type of legislative action that bolster public confidence in the management of Georgia's voting system,' Totenberg wrote. 'Through litigation and other means, plaintiffs no doubt played a part in prompting these changes.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
32 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Supreme Court Rules on Birthright Citizenship: What to Know
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Supreme Court is meeting on Friday to decide the final cases of its term, including one concerning President Donald Trump's bid to end birthright citizenship for U.S.-born children of parents who are in the country illegally. Why It Matters The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that all children born in the United States are automatically American citizens. But the issue before the justices in Trump v. CASA is not the lawfulness of Trump's executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship for some people. Rather, they are weighing whether judges have the authority to issue the nationwide, or universal, injunctions, that have blocked Trump's order from being implemented. The Trump administration has complained that judges are overreaching by issuing orders that apply to everyone instead of only the parties involved. Such orders have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations over the past decade, but they have emerged as an important check on Trump's agenda, increasingly frustrating the president and his allies. The U.S. Supreme Court is seen in Washington, D.C., on June 24, 2025. The U.S. Supreme Court is seen in Washington, D.C., on June 24, 2025. Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images What To Know Trump signed an executive order to deny birthright citizenship to children born in the U.S. to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily shortly on his first day back in office on January 20. Federal judges in Maryland, Washington and Massachusetts have issued nationwide injunctions blocking Trump's order, with one calling it "blatantly unconstitutional." The Trump administration then made an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court to narrow the court orders that have prevented his executive order from taking effect anywhere in the U.S. At oral arguments in May, the high court appeared highly skeptical on how Trump would implement the changes to birthright citizenship. But justices also showed signs they wanted to limit nationwide court orders. What People Are Saying Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor and president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, previously told Newsweek: "It's very possible, maybe even likely, that the Supreme Court limits nationwide injunctions in Trump v. CASA. Some of the conservative justices, like Justice Gorsuch, have expressed concern that such injunctions give district judges the power to block federal laws nationwide. The Supreme Court may establish a rule to limit injunctions to the parties in the case or the district or circuit where the case is filed. Or it may require a higher standard to grant nationwide relief. Though the criticism of nationwide injunctions may be warranted, having inconsistent immigration holdings in different states may be its own problem. Immigration law needs to be uniform and applied consistently across the country." President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social ahead of oral arguments in the case in May: "Birthright Citizenship was not meant for people taking vacations to become permanent Citizens of the United States of America, and bringing their families with them, all the time laughing at the 'SUCKERS' that we are! "The United States of America is the only Country in the World that does this, for what reason, nobody knows — But the drug cartels love it! We are, for the sake of being politically correct, a STUPID Country but, in actuality, this is the exact opposite of being politically correct, and it is yet another point that leads to the dysfunction of America." Ama Frimpong, Legal Director for immigrant rights nonprofit CASA, said in a statement after oral arguments in the case: "This is not a law or policy that needs to be changed. Let's be clear about what this is. This is an attempt at white supremacy. This is an assault on Black and brown families. On our very existence. "What Trump and the administration are trying to do is erase our communities and our families from this country entirely. They want to deny citizenship to children born here—our children, our babies—just because their parents are immigrants." What's Next The justices take the bench at 10 a.m. for their last public session until the start of their new term on October 6. This article includes reporting from The Associated Press.
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Eagles' AJ Dillon reflects on 'cool experience' attending Trump rally, meeting president
Philadelphia Eagles running back AJ Dillon attended an October rally in Wisconsin for Donald Trump when Trump was the Republican nominee for president. Dillon, with the Green Bay Packers at the time, received a special shutout from Trump, who described Dillon as a "Green Bay football phenom." "You may know that name Quadzilla, the Quad Father – AJ Dillon. I got to meet him backstage. Get healthy soon AJ, get healthy," Trump told Dillon, who missed the 2024 season with a neck injury. Dillon reflected on the "cool experience" in a recent interview with Fox News Digital. "It was cool. I had never met a president before. Cool experience. I never even met Brett Favre before that," Dillon said. "It was a cool experience. If you're getting called out by a president, regardless who you voted for, whoever it may be, that's just a cool experience in itself. "Happy to have been there, been able to meet him, take pictures, stuff like that. I had never been to a rally and got that full experience, but definitely cool, for sure." Dillon's comments echoed those of new teammate Saquon Barkley. Barkley played a round of golf with Trump in April, shortly before the Eagles visited Trump at the White House, and took those who were disappointed in him to task. "lol some people are really upset cause I played golfed and flew to the White House with the PRESIDENT," Barkley posted to X shortly after the round. "Maybe I just respect the office, not a hard concept to understand. Just golfed with Obama not too long ago… and look forward to finishing my round with Trump ! Now ya get out my mentions with all this politics and have amazing day." Hulk Hogan and Danica Patrick also attended that October rally in Wisconsin, one of the seven swing states Trump had won to become president a second time. Hall of Fame quarterback and Packers legend Brett Favre spoke at the rally, where he likened Trump to his former team as a "winner." Follow Fox News Digital's sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
‘Forest fire': Corporate America's bitcoin buying spree fuels concern
Corporate America is finally embracing bitcoin. That has even some cryptocurrency boosters nervous. In the latest sign of how President Donald Trump's election has changed the perception of the digital assets industry, dozens of companies have begun pouring billions of dollars into bitcoin, creating so-called crypto treasuries. The emerging trend was underscored recently when Trump's own social media company, Trump Media & Technology Group, unveiled plans to raise and spend about $2.5 billion on bitcoin. The gambit of selling stock and debt to buy bitcoin is helping to turbocharge the companies' shares as crypto prices soar. Yet critics warn that hoovering up digital assets could backfire whenever the volatile crypto markets take a turn for the worse. And some fear that the rush of corporate investors presents a risk to crypto itself that could feed into any panic during the market's next selloff. 'It's a lot of kindling being built up,' said Nic Carter, founding partner at Castle Island Ventures, a crypto-focused investment firm. 'There's going to be a forest fire, and it's going to be catastrophic.' Washington is beginning to take notice. Sen. Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat who has criticized Trump's enthusiasm for the upstart industry, raised concern about companies 'investing in crypto despite its financial risks and potential for corruption,' in a statement to POLITICO. A former Wall Street regulator, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, said the rise of corporate crypto treasuries — particularly those that are being built up through debt — could be 'the instigator of the next crypto crash.' And Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, warned that the fallout from any future crypto crisis could reach beyond digital assets. 'When crypto crashed in 2022, the shock stayed mostly inside the crypto bubble, so our broader economy kept humming,' Warren said in a statement. 'If businesses start piling crypto onto their balance sheets, the next bust won't be so contained, and it could trigger layoffs and business failures in multiple sectors.' Still, the crypto market is riding high five months after Trump took office and kicked off his campaign to make the U.S. the 'undisputed bitcoin superpower' and the 'crypto capital of the world.' Trump's financial regulators have pulled back from an enforcement crackdown on the industry. The White House and Republican lawmakers have made crypto legislation a priority. And investors are latching onto anything tied to the roaring industry. Bitcoin recently notched an all-time high of nearly $112,000. More than 60 publicly listed companies around the world had bitcoin treasury operations that collectively owned more than 673,000 bitcoins — valued at more than $75 billion — as of the end of May, according to Standard Chartered. Among them is Trump Media, which announced late last month that it was selling about $1.5 billion worth of stock and another $1 billion in debt to buy bitcoin. CEO Devin Nunes said at the time that bitcoin is 'an apex instrument of financial freedom, and now Trump Media will hold cryptocurrency as a crucial part of our assets.' A spokesperson for Trump Media did not respond to a request for comment. 'Everybody wants it as a balance-sheet item,' Eric Trump, the president's second son who has become a leading voice for the family business, said at a recent bitcoin conference. 'Everybody wants it, no one wants to get rid of it, and it's incredibly powerful. I think you're going to see the value skyrocket.' But the concern over companies bingeing on bitcoin is underscoring an uncomfortable truth about the 17-year-old market. While crypto may be the object of intrigue from investors and policymakers, it remains a risky asset class known for wild price swings — the next batch of which could leave an even broader array of mom-and-pop investors facing steep losses. 'The crypto industry is just prone to everyone being overly optimistic during the booms and then coming to regret it during the bust,' said Omid Malekan, an adjunct professor at Columbia University who teaches courses on blockchain technology and crypto. Pioneered by billionaire Michael Saylor's Strategy, a software company-turned-bitcoin giant, corporate crypto treasuries have amassed a growing following. Other companies that have jumped into the craze include former Japanese hotel company Metaplanet, the Trump-backed bitcoin firm American Bitcoin and a string of new ventures that are being set up to buy and hold bitcoin. Some have expanded into holding other tokens. 'It's the institutionalization of crypto adoption,' said Ravi Doshi, global co-head of markets at crypto financial services firm FalconX. 'You have more and more individuals buying crypto assets every day. But now, you're going to also see institutions do the same. … Companies have for years had U.S. Treasuries sitting on their balance sheets and now, they're like, 'You know what, actually bitcoin deserves a spot, [too].'' Wall Street has generally celebrated crypto-treasury companies with higher stock prices. The proliferation of such entities, proponents say, is offering investors greater access to the crypto markets. Those include bond fund managers who can only dabble in debt products and individual investors whose brokerages don't allow them to trade crypto-linked investment products. Companies are also able to cheaply raise cash through the stock and debt markets that can then be used to buy more bitcoin, effectively allowing them to multiply their returns on investment, Doshi said. Yet, whether investors will keep rewarding crypto-treasury companies is unclear. Currently, many of those stocks are trading at premiums relative to the value of their underlying bitcoin holdings. But critics like Jim Chanos, the long-time hedge fund manager who is best known for his bet against Enron before the company's spectacular collapse in the early 2000s, warn that those levels are unsustainable and bound to plunge should crypto start selling off. 'They call it the flywheel concept. I call it a financial perpetual motion machine,' said Chanos, who has been betting against Strategy's stock. He added that because the companies are not doing anything distinct for their businesses, they risk being 'competed away.' 'This is going to be self-defeating,' he said. Castle Island Ventures' Carter said the use of debt by companies to buy bitcoin for their treasuries is particularly worrisome. That's because whenever the market drops, they may need to start dumping the crypto, fueling the decline. For Christy Goldsmith Romero, who recently stepped down as a commissioner at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, companies need to make sure they are managing their finances appropriately. If not, she said, there is 'certainly a risk' that those with crypto treasuries will wind up strapped for cash during a downturn in the market and be forced to sell their bitcoin. But some crypto-treasury companies aren't fretting. In an interview, Twenty One Capital CEO Jack Mallers, whose newly formed bitcoin treasury company is backed by crypto giant Tether and recently struck a deal to go public on Wall Street, said if others wind up over their skis and are forced to sell bitcoin, they'll be there 'with smiles and dollars to buy it all up.' 'You don't buy scarce, desirable property and then get rid of it,' Mallers said. 'Leverage is only a problem when you exceed your means. Borrowing capital, taking out a loan — that's actually how society has been financed.'
