Georgia Supreme Court partially invalidates state election rules
Georgia Supreme Court strikes down four state election rules, citing overreach by the State Election Board.
Court rules organizational plaintiffs lack standing; individual voters Turner and Hall can challenge.
Chief Justice highlights nondelegation doctrine to prevent legislative power transfer to agencies.
ATLANTA - In a significant ruling, the Georgia Supreme Court has invalidated four of seven state election rules approved by the State Election Board before the November 2024 general election. Additionally, it found that two of the remaining rules could not be considered during the appeal.
PREVIOUS STORY: Georgia Supreme Court considering if judge was right to block State Election Board rules
The three-person Republican majority on the State Election Board, which was praised by then-former President Donald Trump during a rally in Atlanta in August, voted to adopt multiple rules in August and September 2024 over the objections of the board's lone Democrat and the nonpartisan chair.
What we know
The decision, which partially affirms, reverses, and vacates a previous ruling by the Fulton County Superior Court, sends the case back to the trial court for further review. Fulton County Superior Court Judge Thomas Cox had ruled in mid-October that 7 of the rules were "illegal, unconstitutional and void."
The rules in question included requirements for county election boards to conduct "reasonable inquiries" before certifying election results, hand-counting ballots, daily reporting of vote totals, expanded access for poll watchers, photo ID requirements for absentee ballot drop-offs, and video surveillance of drop boxes. The Court found that only the video surveillance rule was valid, while the others exceeded the State Election Board's authority.
The underlying lawsuit, brought by Eternal Vigilance Action, Inc. and individuals Scot Turner and James Hall, argued that the 7 rules contradicted the state Election Code.
RELATED STORY: Georgia election battle: Parties clash in court over controversial voting rules
The State, along with the Republican National Committee, appealed, questioning the plaintiffs' legal standing. The court heard oral arguments in Cartersville on March 19. The Court concluded that organizational plaintiffs (Eternal Vigilance and Georgia State Conference of the NAACP) lacked standing, but individual voters Turner and Hall did have standing.
What they're saying
Chief Justice Nels S.D. Peterson, in a unanimous opinion, emphasized the importance of the nondelegation doctrine, which prevents the transfer of legislative power to administrative agencies. The Court's decision underscores the need for clear statutory authority in rule-making and highlights the ongoing debate over election integrity and governance in Georgia.
Click to open this PDF in a new window.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
Editorial: Gerrymandering now truly is a dangerous threat to American democracy
'If the United States is to deter a nuclear attack,' then-U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara said in a 1967 speech in San Francisco, 'it must possess an actual and a credible assured-destruction capability.' McNamara was elucidating a long-established defense concept known as 'mutually assured destruction,' meaning that if one side has the ability to destroy its enemy but knows that it cannot do so without being destroyed itself, and that its enemy can and will act to do precisely that, stability is the result. Something like that argument is being applied to gerrymandering, which is applying nuclear-level destruction to American democracy at both state and federal levels. And it is proliferating. California Gov. Gavin Newsom used the phrase 'fight fire with fire' when he said he planned to work with the California legislature and congressional representatives on a plan that would temporarily set aside California's independent redistricting commission. The aim is to draw a map that would offset any gains the GOP makes in Texas, where President Donald Trump and Gov. Greg Abbott are trying to force a gerrymandered, mid-decade congressional map through the Texas legislature with the aim of maintaining Republican control of the U.S. House. That action in Texas, of course, explains why Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker was holding a news conference this week with Texas Democrats who had fled the Lone Star State to try to prevent, well, their own mutually assured destruction. After other Texans in exile made their way to New York City for a separate news conference, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said that 'if Republicans are willing to rewrite these rules to give themselves an advantage, then they're leaving us no choice, we must do the same.' Closer to home, Pritzker assailed what was happening in Texas as a 'corrupt' act, likely to 'silence millions of voters,' with nary a sense of irony, as if his own party was squeaky clean on the matter in Illinois, which is hardly the case. Illinois Republicans, or what is left of them, roared at the hypocrisy, given that the Illinois version of gerrymandering, as egregiously implemented in 2021, has effectively disempowered Republicans, and thus Republican voters, to the point that very few of them even see a point in running for office in Illinois districts anymore, beyond the safe Republican islands. That's despite 44% of Illinoisans voting for Trump in 2024. The problem with applying the language of assured mutual destruction is that democracy does not die in a nuclear flash, to be avoided at all costs. It dies progressively, eaten away by incremental loss of trust. The Illinois State Fair, which began Thursday in Springfield, is typically the kickoff of the new political season. But this year serious Republican candidates in districts now held by Democrats are outnumbered not just by cows but maybe even the one made of butter. Party representatives tell us that donors can read maps with impossible odds like anyone else and thus no longer see much point in supporting Republican efforts in Illinois. They feel their money is better spent on races outside the state, the competitiveness of which are now being undermined by Trump and his cronies in Texas and elsewhere. Indiana appears to be next. Vice President JD Vance already has met with the Indiana governor and Republican legislative leaders, reportedly to 'discuss ways to strengthen the GOP's House majority ahead of the 2026 midterms.' The vice president would have been better advised to stand for fair and impartial maps in the Hoosier State and beyond. He should be shouting out for democracy, loud and clear. We've railed against gerrymandering on both state and federal levels before, of course, and not just to lament the cowardice on gerrymandering displayed by the Illinois Supreme Court, as well the U.S. Supreme Court's lamentable 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Cause that removed federal courts as a crucial check on partisan gerrymandering. At the time, Chief Justice John Roberts clearly recognized the threat gerrymandering posed to democracy, but the 5-4 court majority he led ruled that the only lawful remedies were political, as distinct from federal judicial intervention. Already that decision has not aged well. We're with Justice Elena Kagan, who wrote in her dissent: 'The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government. Part of the Court's role in that system is to defend its foundations.' If not that, then what else is the court for? We're back on the topic today to say that the events of the last few days only have deepened our conviction that gerrymandering is a real and present threat to American democracy that must be stopped before yet more damage is done. We also are here to say that phrases like 'fire with fire' and 'all's fair in love and war' are nothing more than lazy, partisan thinking, tempting as they may be to utter. So we were glad to hear Rep. Mark Lawler of New York say on CNN Tuesday that he thought what his fellow Republicans were doing in Texas was 'wrong.' A voice in the wilderness perhaps, but a voice nonetheless. 'We have to actually have neutral districts across this country,' Lawler told the news outlet. 'It would serve the country better.' Ya think? In a separate interview with PBS, wherein he strikingly echoed the arguments in Kagan's dissent from 2019, Lawler allowed that 'both sides have been guilty' of gerrymandering. 'We should have competitive districts based on communities of interest, and ultimately the voters, not the politicians, should decide who is in the majority,' he said. Such a novel concept. Lawson has said he plans to introduce legislation that would 'outright ban gerrymandering.' Good for him. We hope to be able to support that. We think all Americans with a sense of fairness should do the same. Erudite cynics like Karl Rove have written that gerrymandering has been around as long as there have been politicians and districts and that public officials invariably become inured to their own hypocrisy. . Perhaps. But such is the frighteningly rapid deterioration of structural fairness within the American political system these last few months, thanks mostly to a craven administration that sees everything as a zero-sum game and its singular ability to bring out the worst in its opponents, that surely some who have failed to see the clear and present dangers might wake up. Even if that means acting against their own short-term interests. This isn't about one side laying down its arms, or refusing to do so. It's about building a structure with bipartisan buy-in so both are able to do so at once. We like to believe that could still be done in America.
Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
Clarence Page: Time for Democrats to get serious about their political future
Gee, what's happened to the 'silly season' of U.S. politics? That's what many of us in the daily journalism trades used to call the periods, usually in late summer or near holidays, when news media put an unusually intense focus on lighthearted or frivolous storiesbecause of a shortage of more serious news. We currently have no such shortage. Even late-breaking investigations and speculation surrounding the suicide of President Donald Trump's late acquaintance Jeffrey Epstein have had to compete with a ferocious partisan war within some of the states over redistricting. Consider Texas, where Republicans in the state legislature are attempting, at Trump's urging, to redraw congressional districts in order to flip five more districts to Republican majorities. Democratic legislators fled the state to deny the legislature a quorum, in hopes of preventing Republicans from carrying out their plan. Some have taken refuge in Illinois, leading Texas Republicans to call for their arrest by the FBI. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker has vowed to protect them. 'Donald Trump is trying to steal five seats from the people — frankly, of the country, not just the people of Texas — and disenfranchise people,' Pritzker said on 'The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.' 'We're talking about violating the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution.' Pritzker also declined to turn away from the possibility of a mid-decade congressional remap in his own state. He told Colbert: 'It's possible. I've said everything is on the table. We've gotta fight fire with fire.' Are we starting to see the hardball attitude that many frustrated Democrats have been urging their national party to adopt? Still smarting from the debacle of Joe Biden's 2024 candidacy and the subsequent defeat of the Kamala Harris-Tim Walz ticket, Democrats appear increasingly ready to face a real threat to their ability to regain power in 2026 and beyond. For their part, Republicans are not trying to hide their determination to gerrymander their way out of a midterm backlash in November 2026. Vice President JD Vance visited Indiana to urge lawmakers to redraw their congressional map. It's already a reliably Republican-voting state, but it appears the GOP wants to leave nothing to chance. I find it to be no small irony that these battle lines are being drawn on the 60th anniversary of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Some of us are old enough to remember the feeling that a new page in American history had been turned when that law was enacted. We believed that it would finally end the denial and dilution of Black voting power. That dream, once won, now must be defended once again. Frankly, it's been a never-ending chore. The last time House Democrats held the majority, they introduced a sweeping package of good-government reforms, including a centerpiece legislation to end partisan gerrymandering. 'The people should choose their politicians,' then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in 2021 before the House passed the For the People Act, which would later die in the Senate. 'Politicians should not be choosing their voters.' Of course, choosing their voters is precisely what Trump and Republican legislatures intend to do. Trump's team has pushed Republicans to redraw maps 'wherever redistricting is an option.' Democrats can't afford to respond with anything less. Indeed, some Democrats, such as California Gov. Gavin Newsom, are switching from their past lofty positions in favor of bipartisan redistricting commissions to embracing the idea of fighting fire with fire. Pelosi, who remains a member of the U.S. House, said that while Democrats favor nationwide independent commissions to draw congressional district maps, 'Democrats cannot and will not unilaterally disarm.' Recent polling trends show eroding support for Trump's actions and policies, which can aptly summed up as 'reverse Robin Hood' with a police-state sideshow. This is especially the case among independents but is noticeable even among Republicans, many of whom no doubt realize their president is off the chain. A big opportunity is opening for challengers who can show voters sanity, humanity and the backbone to stand up to the schoolyard bully in the Oval Office. And Democrats have shown before that they can rise from the slough of despond to win an electoral mandate. This normally silly season has turned sinister, and the stakes to Democrats are existential. Their first step in winning back voters is showing they're willing to fight.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Miami-Dade is red, but Democrats aren't giving up on Florida
MIAMI — When Miami-Dade County helped elect President Trump in November, effectively taking on a conservative bent after nearly three decades of being solid blue, political operatives here had their worst fears realized: Florida was in fact a red state. The signs of a big political change in southern Florida had been seen for several cycles, including Gov. Ron DeSantis's (R) 2022 win, when he flipped the metropolitan county for the first time in more than 20 years. 'There is nothing more maddening to me than the self-inflicted wounds in Dade,' said Democratic strategist Steve Schale, who is based in Florida and ran former President Obama's 2008 operation in the state. 'Too many in my party — particularly those outside of Florida — thought the Obama '12 and [Hillary] Clinton '16 numbers in Miami were signs the county had become a progressive bastion.' 'But we are talking about a place where most people came here to escape socialist authoritarian governments and crime — so when people on the extreme left tried to justify things like 'Democratic socialism,' imagine how that sounds to the ears of a family that left everything behind — or a family who came here seeking safety to hear things like 'defund the police,' Schale added. Another longtime Democratic operative in Florida said losing Miami-Dade was a 'gut punch' for Democrats. 'We could see the trainwreck coming before the crash happened, but that was a particularly painful moment for any Democrat who cares about this state,' the operative said. Florida Democrats see their problems in Florida as the result of years of neglect following Obama's win in 2012. But they say they haven't given up on trying to move the Sunshine State back into purple state territory. In fact, they say, they're doubling down on their efforts. 'We're still rebuilding, but we've had a lot of success,' said Nikki Fried, chair of the Florida Democratic Party, in an interview with The Hill. Fried pointed to an 8 percent increase in Democratic voter turnout from the 2020 election to the 2024 election. She also credited work the state party has done to generate gains on school boards and county commissions. Miami-Dade Mayor Daniella Levine Cava (D) was also able to win reelection by a wide margin even as the county went in the other direction in 2024. Still, Fried acknowledged there is 'a lot of work to be done and resources we've brought into the state to do that work.' Democrats' voter affiliation in Florida has declined rapidly since 2020. Republican affiliation in the state has also increased, surpassing Democrats by a hair in 2021 and booming to almost 1,500,000 more as of late June. Political observers attribute the drastic changes in party affiliation to a number of factors, including a massive migration of Republican voters to the state during the COVID-19 pandemic. President Trump — who lives in Palm Beach — also has attracted top Republican operatives and donors during his rise to party stardom. Some Democrats don't seem convinced that there's been much movement in their direction at all. 'On the organizational, operational side of things, I don't think things are any better or any worse,' Schale said. He added there's 'still a lot of donor skepticism and donor fatigue' about the most recent cycles in the state. But Democrats can move incrementally with key wins in the next cycle, Schale said. 'Success in 2026 is showing gains and showing improvement, and if you do that you can make the case to donors that there's a trajectory you can invest in,' he said, pointing to David Jolly, the gubernatorial candidate and former Republican congressman who switched parties, and Jose Javier Rodriguez, a former state senator who is a Democratic candidate for Florida attorney general. 'You build back by fixing what you can fix and getting success,' he added, referencing work that Democrats can do to improve their standing with Hispanic voters, among other efforts. And as Trump has stumbled recently in polls and messaging, strategists say now is a good time for Democrats to pounce and try to regain momentum in the state. 'If [Republicans] continue to push for these policies that now have Trump at the lowest approval rating of any president at this point in his second term, I think it would create an environment where, for the first time in decades, Florida voters may say, 'Look, it's time for a change, and the only change now is to give the Democrats a shot at governing,' said Democratic strategist Fernand Amandi, who is based in Miami. He added that the desire for change in Florida is exacerbated by an 'unprecedented affordability crisis that is the sole responsibility' of Republicans, who have had 'total control of state government for almost three decades.' Despite the ripe moment, strategists say it will still be a heavy lift for Democrats to recapture voters — at least right away. 'I live here. I have to be an optimist … but I'm also a realist. It's f‑‑‑ing hard, and there's a lot of work to be done,' Schale said. But the efforts are underway, including the Florida Democratic Party's Pendulum initiative, a year-round organizing program that Fried said has already contributed to significant gains in two deep-red congressional districts where there were off-cycle elections. Fried also pointed to the party's Front Porch Swing initiative, which aims to listen to voters in rural Florida and meet them where they are. Even with small wins in 2024, Fried said there were lessons to be learned from the overall loss in 2024, including how to best connect with voters. While Democrats had more than $1 billion of earned media nationally, 'At the end of the cycle, most voters said, 'What is the message?' from the party,' Fried said. 'We missed the mark on breaking through to everyday Floridians that aren't watching us on the traditional news stations,' she said. Strategists say connecting with voters is especially key right now as Democrats have struggled with getting their base to the ballot boxes in recent election cycles. '[Democrats] have got to field candidates and rally around a disciplined, focused message of where the voters are, and where the voters are right now is they want solutions to this Republican politician-created affordability crisis,' Amandi said. 'If they can do those two things, then they can position themselves to surprise a lot of people next November.' Strategists say that Democrats — from operatives to donors — will have to invest time and money back into Florida if they want to see their party in power once again. 'Democrats don't have the luxury of writing off Florida because Florida is only going to continue to play a critically important role in the Electoral College math as they're only going to gain electoral seats going forward,' Amandi said. 'If you cede states like Florida and Texas, you're in essence saying you're ceding any pathway to win the White House as a Democrat.'
