Dems: GA County Should Rubber-Stamp Elections, No Questions

The Georgia State Election Board (SEB) passed a series of rules clarifying that county election board members have the right to make a “reasonable inquiry” into elections before certifying the results. Another rule clarifies board members are entitled to review election-related material as part of their inquiry. But the Democratic National Committee (DNC), alongside Georgia Democrats, filed a lawsuit Monday over the rules, essentially demanding the courts force county election officials to rubber-stamp elections without any questions asked.

The SEB recently passed a rule (Rule 183-1-12-.02) clarifying that county election boards can fulfill their certification responsibility “after reasonable inquiry that the tabulation and canvassing of the election are complete and accurate and that the results are a true and accurate accounting of all votes cast in that election.”

The SEB also approved another amendment last week (Rule 183-1-12-.12), which, in part, requires county boards to make available “all election related documentation created during the conduct of elections prior to certification of results.”

But a lawsuit lodged Monday night by the DNC essentially argues that certifying an election is ministerial — meaning board members must effectively rubber-stamp election results despite their concerns — rather than discretionary — meaning board members can evaluate election administration before they certify the results.

“Courts across the country have expressly acknowledged that giving election officials the discretion to refuse certification would both threaten to disenfranchise voters and ‘create [] opportunities for election fraud’ on the part of those officials,” the suit states.

The DNC suit alleges the rules would delay certification.

“Through rulemaking, SEB has attempted to turn the straightforward and mandatory act of certification–i.e. confirmation of the accurate tabulation of votes cast–into a broad license for individual board members to hunt for purported election irregularities of any kind, potentially delaying certification and displacing longstanding (and court-supervised) processes for addressing fraud,” the suit continues.

The Washington Post last week regurgitated a similar claim, saying “critics said [the rule passed last week] would empower county election officials to withhold certification of results without justification, potentially thwarting a popular result.”

But a quick call with Cobb County GOP Chairwoman Salleigh Grubbs, who proposed Rule 183-1-12-.12, clarified that her rule never changed the certification deadline. The rule even confirms that results must be certified by the superintendent “not later than 5:00 P.M. on the Monday following the date on which such election was held … .”

“If you actually read the rule, you’ll see there’s nothing in there that would delay certification,” Grubbs told The Federalist.

Grubbs told The Federalist that election superintendents are “withholding documents needed for people to certify the election,” including in her own county (Cobb County).

“The very people that they have in hysterics over it are the same people in control over the information,” she said.

Grubbs said that, for example, the certified list of electors — which lists individuals who are qualified to vote — is already available material for superintendents since they need the list to conduct the election.

Some counties in Georgia seem to already provide election-related material to board members for review prior to certification. For example, Paulding County Elections and Voter Registration Supervisor Deidre Holden told The Federalist that, in Paulding, board members “have access to all recap sheets, tapes and reports” and that the county has “never had a delayed certification.”

When asked how the county maintains a smooth and streamlined process, Holden said that “[a]ll counties should involve their board in the process and give them access to election certification documents.”

“The board is the superintendent of the election and are ultimately responsible for the numbers and the certification. They should have full access prior to certification,” she told The Federalist.

The DNC suit also takes issue with a portion of rule 183-1-12-.12 which, in part, requires the board members to “compare the total number of ballots cast to the total number of unique voter ID numbers,” clarifying that “[i]n any precinct in which the number of ballots exceeds the number of unique voters, the Board shall determine the method of voting in which the discrepancy exists.”

State statute already stipulated prior to the implementation of the rule that, should the number of ballots exceed the number of voters, the “excess shall be deemed a discrepancy and palpable error and shall be investigated by the superintendent” before certification.

But the suit alleges that, “[a]lthough the petition purports to ask SEB to ‘adopt a rule to affirm existing Georgia law,’ … its contents go beyond any existing statutory requirements.”

The suit alleges that the “proposed rule adds a non-statutory step in the canvassing process by requiring that ‘[a] list of all voters who voted in the election’ be compiled and examined for duplicates,” and claims “[t]hat [this] requirement goes beyond the already-detailed statutory scheme for canvassing … .”

The suit also claims that the “reasonable inquiry” rule passed earlier this month creates doubt in the election certification process, citing comments from the Democratic Party of Georgia (DPG) “urging SEB to reject the Reasonable Inquiry Rule,” and claiming the rule “‘serves only as a pretext to sow seeds of doubt about the election certification process, all but guaranteeing chaos in Georgia elections in the coming weeks and months.’”

However, SEB member Janelle King, who voted in favor of both rule changes, said in a recent statement that “[e]nsuring that every County election board member has access to all election-related documentation” as these rules allow, “actually strengthens the certification process.”

“By being fully informed, board members are better equipped to certify with confidence, knowing they have all necessary information to support their decisions.”

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2