A Georgia judge has ruled that county election board members cannot obstruct the certification of votes based on suspicions of fraud or error, according to a recent decision. This ruling, if upheld, resolves the issue of whether local election officials can exclude certain precincts from county vote totals on the grounds of suspected fraud or error, despite a new rule adopted by the State Election Board that appeared to sanction such actions.
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney emphasized in the ruling that allowing county election board members to act unilaterally to discount election results would effectively silence Georgia voters. He stated that neither the Constitution nor the Election Code permits such actions.
The ruling originated from a lawsuit filed by Julie Adams, a Republican member of Fulton County’s election board and part of a right-wing group expressing doubts about U.S. election integrity. Adams’ legal counsel argued that the new election rule granted board members the authority to refuse certification of votes perceived as fraudulent or erroneous, even extending to entire precincts.
A ProPublica analysis indicated that if Adams’ interpretation of the rule was upheld, certain rural counties could annul enough votes to alter presidential election outcomes. Following former President Donald Trump’s electoral loss in 2020, Georgia Republicans initiated efforts to restructure county election boards, sometimes replacing Democrats with Trump supporters. For instance, election boards in Spalding, Troup, and Ware counties are now dominated by election skeptics. If Adams’ argument were accepted, these boards could potentially eliminate ballots from Democratic precincts, thereby altering the vote count.
In response to these developments, the chairman of Spalding County’s election board declined to comment, while the chair of Ware County’s board was unavailable. William Stump, the chair of Troup County’s board, questioned the partisan nature of his board, stating that their primary focus is accuracy and timeliness in vote counting.
McBurney’s ruling explicitly prohibits excluding votes from Democratic precincts. Instead, if fraud or systemic error is suspected, the appropriate course of action is for the election board member to report these concerns to the district attorney, as per Georgia law, rather than conducting their own investigations.
The ruling also stresses that disputes over election outcomes should be resolved through court contests, which take place in public under judicial oversight, instead of being decided privately by county board members.
This decision is the latest in a legal series concerning the authority of county election board members to delay or obstruct certification of election results—a power that experts have warned could influence presidential election outcomes. Despite this, certification has historically been viewed as a nondiscretionary duty for board members.
The legal challenge was primarily advanced by Adams, who also sought greater access to election materials before certifying votes. McBurney accorded this access but stated that delays in information delivery do not justify refusal to certify results.
Richard Lawson, Adams’ attorney, noted that the lawsuit was aimed at ensuring access to necessary election materials and the ability to challenge alleged irregularities, with the ruling preserving these rights.
Experts anticipate an appeal of the ruling, suggesting a final decision could approach closer to the election. Adams and her attorney did not respond to inquiries about their plans concerning an appeal.
In a parallel case involving another rule purported to enable election disruption, McBurney asserts the obligation of county board members to certify election returns by state deadlines. Meanwhile, further legal actions concerning State Election Board rules continue, with McBurney expressing frustration over efforts to impose rules inconsistent with state laws.
Heather Vogell contributed to the reporting of this information.