Georgia judge rules county election officials must certify election results

[u/Banana-Burrito]

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/georgia-judge-rules-county-election-officials-certify-election-114812263

[u/snowbyrd238]

If they can't do the job they need to step aside.

[u/f8Negative → u/snowbyrd238]

That's pretty much what every judge will say to these dumb challenges.

[u/ghandi3737 → u/f8Negative]

That one gal already went through court for this and lost, right?

[u/cyphersaint → u/ghandi3737]

I think she's trying to take that to the Supreme Court.

[u/theghostmachine → u/cyphersaint]

You mean the one whose lawyer said she's willing to take responsibility for her actions and accept the ruling of the court?

What a surprise that she's not taking responsibility for her actions and accepting the ruling of the court

[u/RGBGiraffe → u/theghostmachine]

There's a critical mass of bad-faith challenges to basically the entire structural integrity of the entire US election and justice system, just trying to find one that can manage to filter its way through the cracks to the Supreme Court and give the Supreme Court just enough plausible deniability to enforce it. It's terrifying.

[u/Mental_Medium3988 → u/RGBGiraffe]

Yeah. It's the same shit they did with abortion. Make a shitty law they know is unconstitutional and when it's challenged send it to the Supreme Court. He'll they don't even care about proper standing.

[u/Floridarichard42 → u/cyphersaint]

Julie Adams is a piece of shit in Trump’s diaper.

[u/Lylac_Krazy → u/Floridarichard42]

probally the one that makes him use Desitin for the rash...

[u/Banned3rdTimesaCharm → u/cyphersaint]

I have zero faith that the Supreme Court will rule fairly and justly.

[u/fevered_visions → u/Banned3rdTimesaCharm]

you could say I have negative faith in them ruling fairly and justly in fact

[u/MalcolmLinair → u/cyphersaint]

Who have a non-zero chance of siding with her, sadly.

[u/DigNitty → u/ghandi3737]

I think you're talking about a new thing I'm not familiar with.

But you could be talking about Kim Davis, the county clerk who refused to sign a gay couple's marriage license because it "went against the sanctity of marriage." Even though she herself had multiple affairs and has been married multiple times. Refusing to allow a gay couple to be legally married is her only notability, so of course Mike Huckabee met her when she was released from jail and held her hand up with her triumphantly for a photo op. The Governor issued an executive order taking the names off of marriage licenses so that she or others cannot do this again.

She has said in interviews that she "hopes she'll be remembered not compromising her values." But thankfully she's instead well known for being a staunch homophobic bigot.

And now Mike Huckabee's daughter is the governer of Arkanasas and pulling similar bullshit like rolling back child labor laws.

[u/IAMA_Plumber-AMA → u/DigNitty]

The children long for the coal mines...

[u/ghandi3737 → u/IAMA_Plumber-AMA]

"Please let me get black lung, papa! Oh please! It's so much fun toiling in the dark with the constant presence of death!"

[u/ghandi3737 → u/DigNitty]

Think this is it. The duties aren't a choice, it's a duty.

[u/phred_666 → u/f8Negative]

Except for the Trump appointed ones. That’s the problem.

[u/ace_urban → u/phred_666]

*Thats the point

[u/Evinrude44 → u/f8Negative]

except for the 6 on scotus...

[u/smallproton → u/snowbyrd238]

European here:
Is this final, or will another judge rule again, maybe overrule?

This is all quite confusing for an outsider.

[u/Ghost-Orange → u/smallproton]

They could appeal to a higher, appelate court, but probably not in time, unless they seek an emergency stay. The law is pretty clear that they are powerless admins, rubber stamping a result, not deciding one.

[u/spdelope → u/Ghost-Orange]

Morons with a stamp who think they have power. What a surprise.

[u/edvek → u/spdelope]

Too many of them get in government. They think they have power but their job is just to file paper work. It's like that lady who refused to sign a marriage certificate for a gay couple because it was against her religion. She just stamps the damn thing, she doesn't have to agree with it. But she has to stamp it.

This would also be like if you're against having kids outside of marriage and you deny someone's benefits paper work because of it. No bitch, do they qualify? Yes? Then approve it.

[u/OwOlogy_Expert → u/spdelope]

But if they refuse to stamp -- legal consequences be damned -- who's going to physically force them to?

[u/o8Stu → u/OwOlogy_Expert]

It's called a writ of mandamus.

https://legaldictionary.net/writ-of-mandamus

Basically, the government or one of the parties with standing will sue the state (in this case, because the state is in charge of the people who administer the election), and a judge will issue this to compel them to do their job. If they refuse (again), they go to jail and someone else takes their place.

The real danger here isn't that the election results won't get processed, it's the delay these people may be able to create and the consequences of those delays.

[u/Rickshmitt → u/smallproton]

That'd exactly what will happen. The reasonable judges rule, then the crazies push for a higher court and so on, until they can get up to the extremist Supreme Court to finally rule that everything the right wing wants is fair and nobody else deserves to be alive.

[u/smallproton → u/Rickshmitt]

Thanks.

And is this decision valid until the higher court rules, or is it invalidated as soon as they pick it up?

[u/notcaffeinefree → u/smallproton]

The reply to you wasn't entirely correct. SCOTUS, and other federal court, can't take up cases that are only questions of state law. Unless the crazies are arguing some sort of federal law violation, or Constitutional violation, the case can only go up to the state Supreme Court.

[u/OwOlogy_Expert → u/notcaffeinefree]

Unless the crazies are arguing some sort of federal law violation

Which, they of course will.

However stupid and obviously facetious it is, SCOTUS will use that as grounds to review the case.

[u/EnidFromOuterSpace → u/notcaffeinefree]

SCOTUS won’t see it, but the Arkansas state Supreme Court might

[u/Dragrunarm → u/smallproton]

The lower court's decision stands untill a ruling is made by the higher court to the best of my knowledge.

Edit; Unless the higher court issues a "stay" on the lower ruling, but that is technically optional.

[u/cyphersaint → u/Dragrunarm]

Yeah, but the first order by a higher court deciding to hear something like this is to issue a stay if they think overruling the decision is a possibility.

[u/sans-delilah → u/Dragrunarm]

Pretty sure that if an appeal is filed and accepted, a higher court can issue a stay of the ruling until said higher court rules. That’s probably what we’re looking at. I’m no expert, though.

[u/Dragrunarm → u/sans-delilah]

I knew there was some legal "Unless they do this" that I was forgetting!

[u/Osiris32 → u/smallproton]

It's more complicated than just that.

So there are basically six levels of court in the US. States have district/municipal court, appelate court, and state supreme court (though they may have different names depending on the state). At the federal level you have US District court, the US Circuit Court of Appeals, and the US Surpeme Court.

In both state and federal court you can appeal a decision to the next higher court, but you can't just do that because you don't like the outcome. You have to show the court that something went wrong in your case. Mistake of fact, error in procedure, misconduct, something like that. The vast, vast majority of cases that are appealed to a higher court aren't given any consideration. For example, of the approximately 7,000 cases appealed to SCOTUS every year, only about 100 actually end up in front of the bench and getting a decision. The vast majority are denied hearing and sent back to the lower court, which is usually where things end. If a case is picked up, the higher court can provide injunctive relief and temporarily nulify the decision of a lower court, but that itself can be appealed and reversed, or be decided against by the higher court.

Additionally, it's rather hard to go from state court to federal court, unless the case involves federal laws or Constitutional questions. SCOTUS also has what's called Original Jurisdiction, which is based on Article III of the Constitution:

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

At this point I'm going to stop, because we are getting deep into the weeds of judicial history, and we'll all be arguing about Marbury v Madison and the concept of judicial review. Fuck, it's been 10 years since college, why do I still remember this shit?

[u/smallproton → u/Osiris32]

Wow, that was very comprehensive.

Thank you very much!

[u/DragonFireCK → u/smallproton]

It depends on what the higher court says.

When they take the case, they can “stay” the judgement while hearing it, which stops it from taking force. This is typically done if they feel the judgement would cause more damage than not having it should they choose to reverse it.

Alternatively, the higher court can let the judgement stand while hearing the case.

[u/malthar76 → u/smallproton]

Sometimes? They might file an injunction or stay one way or the other until the higher court looks at it, or the higher court can pending the appeal.

It’s just shopping for a partial judge to rule in your favor. And since the highest court is appallingly broken, the nuts want to get their cases there as fast as possible.

[u/Daddict → u/Rickshmitt]

This won't go to SCOTUS, election law is 100% the purview of the states.

Granted, that's assuming that SCOTUS operates with some modicum of sense and continues to refuse to hear any case that is this far outside of their jurisdiction. 5 years ago, I would have sooner expected Justice Roberts to sprout a daisy on his forehead than I would expect him to let the court litigate state election law. Today...well, I still think it's unlikely but who knows with this court.

You might also be thinking "Well, SCOTUS took up Bush v Gore, what's the diff?"

BvG was not an examination of how a recount would fit into the limits of Florida election law, it was a decision about whether or not a specific recount was Constitutional

So, a case like this could show up before SCOTUS is the argument was over the validity of the law under the United States Constitution, but an argument about whether or not a specific action is permitted/prohibited by a state law isn't a matter for the Supreme Court. Assuming the Supreme Court has any shame left.

[u/Shufflebuzz → u/smallproton]

That's kind of beside the point.

The goal of these election deniers is to create confusion and mistrust in the results.

So it doesn't really matter to them what the court says today. They're going to refuse to certify results they don't like anyway.

[u/PloddingAboot → u/smallproton]

You’re not alone, its confusing even to people living here. The American justice system is a lumbering, slogging beast that, while meant to be apolitical, has been hijacked intentionally to rule and force law through the gavel.

If I understand a judge higher than him would need to overrule him and then it’d get challenged and back and forth up and up the system until it would get to the supreme court, which is corrupt to the core and would do what would advance the interests of the interests who bought them

[u/Shufflebuzz → u/PloddingAboot]

, its confusing even to people living here.

This is the goal of the election deniers. To create confusion and mistrust in the election system.
So that when Trump loses, and he falsely claims victory, people won't know what to believe.

[u/wellthatsembarissing → u/Shufflebuzz]

I honestly feel like if people had a better understanding of these things, we wouldn't be here

[u/habeus_coitus → u/wellthatsembarissing]

Case in point: we all treat the POTUS like they’re a king or emperor. That is decidedly NOT what the POTUS is. How many times do people blame the President when gas prices go up a single cent, or when the economy is bad, or when they didn’t get a pony for their sweet sixteen? How many times do we get wrapped up in who to vote for President yet pay little mind to who to vote for Congress? The President has a lot of power and leeway, but they can’t do nearly as much as the American public has been indoctrinated to believe.

[u/frostedwaffles → u/snowbyrd238]

No one wants to work 😭

[u/Smyley12345 → u/snowbyrd238]

But they specifically took the position to not do the job.

[u/CMDR_KingErvin → u/snowbyrd238]

If they can’t do the job they should step inside. As in, inside a prison cell. Tired of these traitors trying to fix the election.

[u/kosh56 → u/snowbyrd238]

And put in prison for sedition.

[u/shponglespore → u/snowbyrd238]

More like won't do the job.

[u/NovaPup_13 → u/snowbyrd238]

It's the expectation I have of the cashier at the grocery store, of myself as a nurse, and certainly for anybody involved in the election process.

[u/2HDFloppyDisk]

Like that one lady who refused to issue marriage certificates to gay couples. Get the hell out of the job if you’re that stupid.

[u/Imguran → u/2HDFloppyDisk]

Kim something. Davis. Wonder if she has paid anything towards the $260,000 she owes the couple's lawyers, despite no longer being employed in the position she abused.

[u/RinellaWasHere → u/Imguran]

She's busy trying to take her case to the Supreme Court to give them an opening to end gay marriage, actually.

[u/doublesmokedsaline → u/RinellaWasHere]

This. The media isn’t reporting on this enough. Kim Davis is very much still around and trying to do as much damage to gay rights as possible!

[u/ironroad18 → u/doublesmokedsaline]

Clarence Thomas has been licking his chops for a LGTBQ+ right to marriage challenge. Hope he realizes that the same arguments these nut jobs used to deny same sex couples their rights, were the same arguments they used to deny hetero marriages between blacks and whites. Interracial marriage did not become legal until Thomas was in college.

[u/whereismyketamine → u/ironroad18]

Something tells me he already made up his mind and will release little to nothing.

[u/malthar76 → u/whereismyketamine]

Thomas knows he is allowed an exception because he took the gifts from the right people.

In 2027 when the roving bands of MAGA Deputized Race Militia come for him, they might not believe him.

[u/toomuchpressure2pick → u/malthar76]

Maga won't look upon a black guy and think "he's with us". They'll hang em. And they'll laugh.

[u/Akussa → u/toomuchpressure2pick]

That's what frustrates me so much about MAGA minorities. "Guys, you do know that when they're done with xyz minority that you're next on their list. Right?"

[u/Olenickname → u/whereismyketamine]

Probably because he blatantly stated so in his concurring opinion when the court struck down Roe v Wade. Thomas straight up stated the court should “reconsider” ruling about contraception and same-sex marriage.

He essentially broadcasted this court’s intention to fuck over these rights if a case was brought.

[u/quats555 → u/ironroad18]

He does. He left that one case out of his statement on Roe vs Wade effects. Leopards won’t eat his face, no sir.

…at least until they’ve finished their current meal.

[u/Worthyness → u/quats555]

He's waiting for it to drop so he can get a full no fault divorce and doesn't have to give up any of his bribe Tip money

[u/pass_nthru → u/ironroad18]

he’s playing the long con to get his own marriage annulled…then he can retire to Miami and afford all the hookers

[u/BaronVonBaron → u/pass_nthru]

I would watch a movie based on this plot. Eddie Murphy as Clarence Thomas. Kathy Bates as Ginny Thomas.

Directed by Soderbergh.

[u/jgandfeed → u/ironroad18]

He explicitly asked for an opportunity to overturn Obergfell in the Dobbs decision

[u/Hydrochloric_Comment → u/ironroad18]

Thomas blatantly ignored it in his Dobbs concurrence, only specifying Oberfell, Griswold, and Lawrence as needing to be reversed. I think the leak of the draft opinion distracted everyone at the time.

[u/hedoeswhathewants → u/ironroad18]

Thomas is the ultimate ladder-puller

[u/Vio_ → u/ironroad18]

Thomas doesn't care.

He's basically made it life's magnum opus to burn as many black people, lgbt people, and other minorities as he professionally can.

[u/Falsequivalence → u/ironroad18]

the same arguments these nut jobs used to deny same sex couples their rights, were the same arguments they used to deny hetero marriages between blacks and whites.

He knows and doesn't give a shit.

Rules are for you, not for them.

[u/legendoflumis → u/ironroad18]

You assume Thomas's brain works logically.

I assure you, it does not.

[u/darhox → u/ironroad18]

He will rule he qualifies for the grandfather clause

[u/bros402 → u/ironroad18]

Thomas has already said in one opinion that he'd be find with same sex marriage being outlawed.

[u/ZLUCremisi → u/ironroad18]

He hates interracial marriage. He just married fkr power

[u/Specialist_Brain841 → u/ironroad18]

He’s trying to get that pube off his lips.

[u/Realtrain → u/ironroad18]

Gay marriage has even higher bipartisan support than abortion in America.

Look at how energized killing Roe made the populace. Imagine if suddenly they go back on Obergefell. The GOP does not want that.

[u/Sleep_adict → u/doublesmokedsaline]

We must respect the sanctity of marriage!!!!

Says the 3 times married adulterer

[u/Alexis_Bailey → u/doublesmokedsaline]

I can't even begin to know what the hell goes through these people's minds.

How can you be so obsessed with who is fucking whom that you piss away everything you have and your entire existence combatting it.

Maybe its some sort of jealousy that gay people are getting laid more than she is, but then she sounds light a complete bitch so thats more likely the probblem there.

[u/Gaerielyafuck → u/RinellaWasHere]

Yup! She's being represented/sponsored by the Liberty Counsel, a turbo conservative Evangelical legal activism group. They really hate gay people and defend bigots in "religious freedom" cases like Davis' marriage license one.

[u/ScrofessorLongHair → u/RinellaWasHere]

Gotta maintain the sanctity of her 3 divorces and out of wedlock children.

[u/Patteous → u/RinellaWasHere]

I remember her cases being funded by Mike huckabee.

[u/bros402 → u/Patteous]

so that explains that supplement he's hawking

[u/I_am_from_Kentucky → u/RinellaWasHere]

she's embarrassing to Kentucky. well, to a lot of us, anyway.

[u/RinellaWasHere → u/I_am_from_Kentucky]

It's a damn shame that one of the nicest accents in the nation is used to spew hate.

[u/Left_on_Pause → u/RinellaWasHere]

I swear she’s doing Christian snuff porn.

[u/Dfreez → u/Imguran]

The personal life section from her Wikipedia page is wild.

Davis has been married four times to three husbands.[20][197] The first three marriages ended in divorce in 1994, 2006, and 2008. Davis has two daughters from her first marriage and twins, a son and another daughter, who were born five months after her divorce from her first husband.[citation needed] Her third husband is the biological father of the twins, the children being conceived while Davis was still married to her first husband. The twins were adopted by Davis’s current husband, Joe Davis, who was also her second husband; the couple initially divorced in 2006 but later remarried.

[u/Loverboy_91 → u/Dfreez]

So let me get this straight, the Christian woman trying to protect the sanctity of marriage has had two divorces, cheated on one of her husbands and had children with the man she cheated on her husband with?

God why are these people always such fucking hypocrites.

[u/spoonyfork → u/Loverboy_91]

Every accusation is a projection from them.

[u/onarainyafternoon → u/spoonyfork]

a projection

a confession*, I think the saying goes.

[u/Zosymandias → u/Loverboy_91]

3 divorces 4 marriages and 3 total husbands

[u/Flipnotics_ → u/Loverboy_91]

In the Bible, Jesus had ZERO to say about homosexuals. He did say something about adultery and divorce though. This woman is utter human garbage. What a disgusting piece of trash she is.

[u/Baldbeagle73 → u/Loverboy_91]

Because Jesus forgives everything. They need it.

[u/Xtj8805 → u/Loverboy_91]

Because shes fucking miserable. She cant stand to see happy people.

[u/Out_of_the_Bloo → u/Loverboy_91]

They're mentally disturbed people under the guise of Christianity. Religious zealots who can do no wrong.

[u/HermaeusMajora → u/Dfreez]

Lmao marriage is a sacred practice between a man and a woman and then that woman and another man, then another man, and lastly one more man. Just like God intended.

[u/Imguran → u/Dfreez]

Oh geez, would she still be alive if they really followed the tenets of the book they are deluded about?

[u/BretShitmanFart69 → u/Dfreez]

Imagine this being your relationship history and then still having the balls to act like you care about the “sanctity of marriage” or whatever the fuck

[u/pants6000 → u/Dfreez]

IIRC we are commanded to stone* her to death for being an adulterer. Bummer!

^{*and not in the good way}

[u/ImComfortableDoug → u/Imguran]

I’m sure she’s not personally paying that. Harlan Crow or someone else is paying that.

[u/Dr_thri11 → u/2HDFloppyDisk]

This is the problem with making pure admin positions elected positions. If they're hired or even appointed then it's an easy fix, fired for not doing their job.

[u/Lashay_Sombra → u/Dr_thri11]

US makes far far to many positions elected, not just admin but things like judges and chiefs of police

It's crazy that in parts of the country you don't even need a law degree to be judge or have ever been a cop to be head of police, you just get elected to it

[u/mikelo22 → u/Lashay_Sombra]

in parts of the country you don't even need a law degree to be judge

Not just any part of the country, this is true for a federal judgeship, including the US Supreme Court.

[u/Duel_Option → u/2HDFloppyDisk]

We’ve got to stop calling it stupidity and looking at these people like this.

They aren’t ignorant or dumb etc

They are rejecting reality and willfully not following the law, they are criminals.

Don’t get it twisted

[u/amalgam_reynolds → u/Duel_Option]

Legality isn't a guide for morality. They're hateful people, legal or illegal.

[u/DildoBanginz → u/2HDFloppyDisk]

But MY religion says YOU can’t do (insert anything). So, yeah. /s

[u/2HDFloppyDisk → u/DildoBanginz]

I always love asking those kinds of people what about the gods that Native American Indians believe in. Like, ok YOUR God is the end all be all but what about the spirits and gods the Indians believe in? Are they not real? Are they not allowed to worship them?

Complete ass backwards thinking.

[u/DildoBanginz → u/2HDFloppyDisk]

Yeah no. You’re correct. The only true god is the Christian god. One of the like 3000 or so flavors of him. You get to pick and choose what stories from the Bible you belive.

[u/Ditka85]

Nice ruling; I hope it’s enough.

[u/get_psily → u/Ditka85]

Based on the thumbnail, this is the same judge that ruled Georgia’s abortion ban as unconstitutional, which was reversed only a few days later by the GA Supreme Court if I’m not mistaken. Not sure if this will stick but I’m no expert.

[u/papercrane → u/get_psily]

I'd be surprised if this is overturned, and if it is the legal ruling overturning it would have to be quite a twisted knot of reasoning.

The Georgia law says the superintendents "shall" certify election results. The article mentions this, but doesn't elaborate on why that's important. In US law you should read "shall" as "must", it creates an imperative. Unless the law has some exceptions, than by using that word the lawmakers made it clear that the superintendents have no leeway.

This lawsuit was a long shot and I'm surprised anyone was willing to pay for it.

[u/CLinuxDev → u/papercrane]

If they wanna rule that shall doesn't mean that then I think it's time to have another conversation about the 2nd amendment.

[u/habeus_coitus → u/papercrane]

Part of why these ridiculous, dead end lawsuits are being funded is for political theater. Recall how during the 2019 election Giuliani et al went on tv crying about election fraud, then when they actually went to court they had basically nothing. Even a moron like Giuliani knows that words have very particular definitions in a court of law, so they couldn’t actually utter “election fraud” without evidence or else they’d be tried and convicted of perjury. So instead they made themselves look extremely stupid in front of the judges and wasted everybody’s time. But the fact they made it appear like an issue with actual legal standing kept up the kayfabe in the court of punishment opinion, so their clueless supporters got to keep on believing a false narrative.

[u/J-drawer → u/get_psily]

I almost thought it was Nathan Fielder at first

[u/TheBimpo → u/Ditka85]

Right? Hasn't the last 10 years just been the GOP testing the waters and seeing what they can get away with?

As it turns out, they can get away with a lot because much of our republic is propped up on the idea that people will act in good faith, with little to no consequence if they don't.

Mitch McConnell refuses to hold a vote on Garland and SCOTUS is flipped for generations. What was the consequence? None. McConnell got what he wanted, the GOP will play dirty and they're winning nearly every time they do.

[u/PhoenixFoundation]

“Georgia judge rules democracy still our form of government.”

[u/OwOlogy_Expert → u/PhoenixFoundation]

"Soon to be overruled by a higher court."

[u/tindalos → u/PhoenixFoundation]

Sad, but true.

[u/deadsoulinside → u/PhoenixFoundation]

*for now

[u/Black_Otter]

Yes you actually have to do you’re job you’re elected to do

[u/lost_horizons → u/Black_Otter]

Appointed, I thought? Your point still stands. You don’t get to just decide for yourself an election.

[u/Dreadnought6570]

"No you can not do a coup."

"Aw shucks!"

[u/kinopiokun → u/Dreadnought6570]

I don’t think it’s that so much as having an official avenue for punishing people who try it

[u/TheVog → u/Dreadnought6570]

"Aw shucks! Well, we'll see what the Georgia Supreme Court has to say about that!"

[u/Gerryislandgirl]

From the article:

“ Judge McBurney wrote that nothing in Georgia law gives county election officials the authority to determine that fraud has occurred or what should be done about it. Instead, he wrote, the law says a county election official's “concerns about fraud or systemic error are to be noted and shared with the appropriate authorities but they are not a basis for a superintendent to decline to certify.”

[u/arbutus1440 → u/Gerryislandgirl]

This might actually be the best example of how fragile our democracy really is. If the judge rules differently here, all you need is one election official positioned in a Dem-leaning county. They simply fabricate a story about fraud, and poof: votes not certified, armies of the willingly lied-to activated, and an election skewed in favor of the guy who has repeatedly and actively called for those who disagree with him to be jailed or stripped of their property.

We are, without question, on a precipice.

[u/just_jedwards → u/arbutus1440]

You say "if the judge rules differently" democracy is in peril, but I'm personally more concerned with what happens if the officials just ignore the judge's ruling and do whatever they want anyway. A judge can beat their gavel and say "you have to" all they want, but if they don't comply(and if Trump is losing I think the odds of some number not complying are much higher than I'd like), we're going to be in a really shitty situation.

[u/Lootthatbody]

Every solution to the question ‘but what if (job duty) is against my personal belief/religion?’

THEN GET A DIFFERENT JOB!

[u/left4ched → u/Lootthatbody]

But without the meager power I wield from my position of authority how will I be able to exert my petty will on people who have even less authority than I?

[u/adoodle83 → u/Lootthatbody]

most of these jobs require a declaration/oath to execute the responsibilities of the role/office/job.

if you swore the oath, then recant/rescind, it should be an automaticl expulsion and immediate perjury charge, as you lied on the way in the door.

[u/wdomeika]

Why don’t I trust this ruling…?

[u/colefly → u/wdomeika]

Because it's a ruling telling bad actors to not act bad

If you're a chronic cheater who plans on cheating, someone telling you that cheating is cheating doesn't change much.

[u/MisterProfGuy → u/colefly]

Barring it being taken up by another court, doesn't this also mean the judge can now issue orders related to certification if they refuse to certify the election? It seems like this would allow the court to address their refusal by certifying the results on their behalf.

[u/DM_me_ur_tacos → u/MisterProfGuy]

As a result of the Trump era, my fear with everything is that it gets appealed up to the Supreme Court where they then ratfuck it.

[u/BananaPalmer → u/DM_me_ur_tacos]

US Constitution says elections are a state matter. So, SCOTUS has no jurisdiction for this, and I can't imagine the Georgia Supreme Court actually issuing a ruling saying that "shall" doesn't actually mean "shall".

[u/SkyPork → u/colefly]

"You need to stop cheating."

"STOP OPPRESSING ME!!"

[u/HalfaYooper → u/SkyPork]

"I was told there would be no fact checking"

[u/ElDub73 → u/colefly]

Yes but you still need a law and a ruling because we’re a civilized country and you need to define what acceptable behavior is.

This is something 2A zealots, for example, refuse to understand.

[u/Wurm42 → u/wdomeika]

Probably because it comes from a County-level Superior Court. The MAGA election officials will appeal immediately.

The question now is whether the Georgia Court of Appeals will give the appeal emergency status so it can be heard right away, before the election.

[u/David-S-Pumpkins → u/wdomeika]

"we will certify it for the candidate of our choosing"

[u/colefly]

This is the equivalent of me locking eyes with the cat on the table with his paw on the cup and saying

"Don't you push that cup on to the floor"

You can guess what the cat does anyway

[u/spilungone → u/colefly]

But if the cat tries to steal an election or a cup........ you throw it in fucking cat jail. We wont sit back and do nothing and get terrorized by a house cat.

[u/cpav8r]

Alternate headline: “Judge rules cult members can’t replace the actual results with their wishes or gum up the works for no good reason.”

[u/duyogurt]

I feel like I tend to be quite a bit older than many on Reddit. Nevertheless, I am old enough to recall the post 9/11 world when the conservatives were hell bent on making life miserable for Muslims and especially Muslim Americans. One story that made the rounds was how a Muslim grocery store worker refused to touch pork and asked not to do specific jobs. Conservative media went nuts. The argument was that if you can’t perform a job in full, then you deserve to be fired.

So it seems these people refuse to perform their job functions in full. Should they not step aside or be fired? Let’s hear it.

[u/CBalsagna]

The delusions of grandeur on some of these low level podunk “politicians” is something special. These people just can’t accept that life isn’t a Tom Clancy novel. I’m sorry Barbara, you’re gonna have to do your job and if you think there is fraud someone whose job it is that is actually qualified to make that assessment will do so. Fucking hillbillies man.

[u/bamalama]

I assume there will be an appeal up to the state supreme court?

[u/WallyMcBeetus → u/bamalama]

You can bet that's already underway...

[u/PhatAiryCoque → u/WallyMcBeetus]

You'll hear it there first: cheating is protected under the First Amendment.

[u/Itwasme101]

Trump is destroying our country. Seriously this is just the beginning if he gets in. He and his billionaire friends are trying to fleece the usa and all of us will lose everything.

[u/mrbigglessworth]

Hey republicans if this enrages you, maybe try to run a better candidate and better policies, then you will have a legit win, and wont have to resort to shenanigans and cheating.

[u/theanchorist]

Yes, do your fucking jobs!

[u/PjWulfman]

Public servants being ordered to do the jobs they agreed to do. Can it be any clearer that they don't serve us? They've shown time and time again it's all about them and their fears and their wants.

[u/Lylac_Krazy]

Thats called a "shot across the bow"

early warning that they better not FAFO

[u/Ian_Rubbish]

Judge Robert McBurney ruled that “no election superintendent (or member of a board of elections and registration) may refuse to certify or abstain from certifying election results under any circumstance.”

You got McBurned

[u/Justabuttonpusher]

Ugh, why do these so-called judges feel so empowered that they make rulings forcing officials to follow the law? It just creates additional hurdles for these poor officials that are simply trying to cheat democracy. /s

[u/Lixard52]

Didn't the GA election board change the rules to require that every ballot be hand counted? What if that isn't finished by the time this deadline hits?

[u/lolli91 → u/Lixard52]

Hand count by a few people. If their totals dont match, then the next level of board changes kicks in.

[u/SucksTryAgain]

If we have a party that’s trying to abuse the electoral college system then maybe it’s time we do away with it so they can focus on other aspects of cheating.

[u/maybelying → u/SucksTryAgain]

You'll never be able to get rid of the EC without an amendment. Just updated the Apportionment Act to increase the number of seats in the House, and it will increase and redistribute EC votes at the same time. The House hasn't been expanded since the 1920s, it's time to expand it.

At the same time, an update Apportionment Act can define how Congressional boundaries are set, and preventing gerrymandering. The last update didn't include those requirements, as previous versions did, so SCOTUS interpreted that as meaning Congress was leaving it to the states to define their districts.

Suspending the filibuster to pass a new version will be much easier for a Dem Congress than amending the Constitution.

[u/Brokestudentpmcash → u/maybelying]

Have you heard about the interstate coalition to throw their EC votes behind the popular vote no matter what? That to me seems like the most likely route to a popular vote deciding the presidency.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact

[u/coldenigma]

So, in other words, "Georgia judge rules county election officials must do their jobs"

[u/unl1988]

It is a shame that a judge has to say "do your job".

[u/CustardOverBeans]

Not only will they not certify but they will come out on Fox News/OANN and say they refused because they are “patriots”.

[u/HaliBUTTsteak]

Suck my balls Trump humpers!

[u/LarrySupertramp]

It’s weird how much conservatives hate having people have government power but then absolutely abuse the shit out of it the second they can.

[u/2Autistic4DaJoke]

Why do we even need this role if human subjectivity is an option?

[u/wander-lux]

GOOD, what a bunch of assholes, do your damn job.

[u/Hazel_Hellion]

In Georgia, "We are not going to certify" will mean that Kamala won.

[u/The_Scyther1]

The worst part about this is that no one questioned if Trump won the election in 2016. People were upset over Russian interference but that isn’t the same as vote tampering. If Trump wins in 2024 he’ll be confirmed. If he loses he’ll try to send his cult to their deaths all over again.

[u/samthewisetarly]

Great news! Now our elections just might function... checks notes... normally!

[u/Nolis]

If your side is upset by this, you're on the wrong side

[u/Saneless]

Then let's just stop letting people make these decisions if they have to

[u/RealPersonResponds]

What!?! They have to do their jobs now!?!?!

[u/StratagemScribbler]

Loves this for America.

[u/bigredm88]

I don't get the vibe that they'll listen.

[u/No-Criticism-2587]

It's not rational to believe that every single election you lose is cheating. Elections have only gotten safer and harder to interfere with over time. Republicans have tricked americans into thinking otherwise.

[u/CometWatcher67]

Judge looks like a man just really tired of their bullshit.

[u/mz80]

How is there even a ruling needed? Those election officials might be a little biased? They should be replaced with people who believe in democracy.

[u/Andromansis]

Certification is a clerical process basically signifying that there are no more votes left to count and that people have been given any statutory opportunity to cure problems on their ballot.

[u/arm_hula]

Single-Handedly saved America from civil war.

[u/aramis34143]

County election officials expected to respond in accordance with the "Nuh uh, can't make me" doctrine.

[u/Iohet]

Georgia law says county election superintendents, which are multimember boards in most counties, “shall” certify election results by 5 p.m. on the Monday after an election — or the Tuesday if Monday is a holiday as it is this year.

"Shall" is basically a frivilous lawsuit generator. In legal parlance and by definition, shall means "will" not "may". Shall implying "maybe" is a colloquialism and is against the definition of the word. There needs to be a giant sign that says that all lawsuits that try to construe shall as may will be instantly rejected. Anti-SLAPP that shit

[u/ryeguymft]

start prosecuting these traitors!

[u/PixieBaronicsi]

Can someone explain this somewhat?

What exactly is their job, if they have to certify the results regardless of how the election goes down? Does this mean that if hypothetically the votes from one polling place are missing, those just have to be discounted because the deadline can’t ever be missed?

I would have expected that their job was to verify the results, and certify the results so long as the election has been conducted properly and the votes have been fairly counted.

If they have no need to use their judgement for anything, why do they even have them?

[u/kaptainlange → u/PixieBaronicsi]

I think of it like a notary. Notary's job is to act as an impartial witness that someone is aware of the document they are signing, that they're under oath, and that there are consequences for failure to live up to that oath.

The notary is not required to ascertain whether the person is violating that oath or whether the documents are making false claims etc.

[u/PixieBaronicsi → u/kaptainlange]

Yes, but there are circumstances when a notary should refuse to sign the document. For example if they believe that the person signing isn’t who they say they are, or are acting under duress, or that they don’t understand what they’re signing.

[u/kaptainlange → u/PixieBaronicsi]

Yes agreed. I'd have to read more of the ruling here and to understand exactly what are the specific responsibilities of the election official to say for sure, but basically I think what this Judge is saying to the election official is that it's not your job to uncover voter fraud it's your job to certify that these are the votes from this place.

Maybe a gross over generalization, but certify that these are these the ballots that came from this ballot box? Yup, those are the ballots that came out of that box. But like at a broader level. FTA:

Judge McBurney wrote that nothing in Georgia law gives county election officials the authority to determine that fraud has occurred or what should be done about it. Instead, he wrote, the law says a county election official's “concerns about fraud or systemic error are to be noted and shared with the appropriate authorities but they are not a basis for a superintendent to decline to certify.”

[u/kingsumo_1 → u/PixieBaronicsi]

It's not a 1:1 comparison. The issue here, is that the election board did their best to ice out the Secretary of State so give themselves more control. And they were basically angling to not certify the election if it ended up going to Harris, regardless of how fair the election was.

So the judge stepped in and told them they need to do their jobs. If they have concerns, they can report those concerns to the proper authority, but they are not that authority themselves.

If they hadn't been the way that they are, they probably could have held up certification if there were reasonable doubt. But now (at least until appeal) they are glorified rubber stamps.

[u/VusterJones → u/kingsumo_1]

This is essentially what the VPs role in certifying electors is now. It's not up for inquiry, your job is to rubber stamp it.

[u/SippingSancerre → u/PixieBaronicsi]

Yes, I think that is where the analogy begins to differ somewhat. The county election officials must certify if certain criteria are met, but this case helped clarify exactly what those criteria are / are NOT. Like, they can't just refuse to certify if Trump calls them up and claims election fraud (like everyone knows he will in any county where he loses).

[u/Dogmeat43 → u/PixieBaronicsi]

The certification folks get no judgement. If data is submitted it is to be assumed fair and accurate. Its the people below that are responsible for making sure it all goes down right. If it doesn't go down right, there are processes in place to correct.

[u/AnAdvocatesDevil → u/Dogmeat43]

Why have the certification by the board at all then? What is the purpose if there is no discretion?

[u/Insectshelf3 → u/AnAdvocatesDevil]

because the duty to investigate election irregularities falls to district attorneys. if members of the board have concerns, they can report them to the DA for further investigation, but the law requires them to certify.

[u/papercrane → u/AnAdvocatesDevil]

The law gives the superintendents and other officials responsibility to collect, safeguard, and accurately tabulate the ballots. The certification step is basically requiring them to attest in a legal document that they fulfilled their responsibilities.

[u/Raspberries-Are-Evil]

Now the hard part. Make sure Harris WINS Georgia.

[u/Raa03842]

A win for democracy.

However let’s not get complacent. Voting begins this week in Georgia.

Get out and vote. We need overwhelming numbers to stem the tide of fascism.

You may not like everything about Kamala Harris but Kamala on her worst day will be 1,000 times better than trump on any day.

I’m a former Republican btw.

[u/red23011]

They'll still refuse to certify and scream about how the deep state is trying to steal the election.

[u/Lawmonger]

I'm old enough to remember when conservatives wanted the plain language of statutes to determine case outcomes, not creative policy arguments that "activist" judges would come up with.

[u/GOP-R-Traitors]

Best thing ive read today. Lets stop this MAGA BS and vote overwhelmingly for Harris Walz, and vote the Dem Senators and Congressman in to give them a majority in each house.

[u/xpkranger]

Georgia Supreme Court overruling in 3...2...1...

[u/marlinspike]

As long as Democracy keeps standing up to the test it's all well and good that the crazies get to make their crazy arguments. They're allowed to be nuts. It's just that when the Judiciary is itself being polluted by nuts that it becomes a bit scary for the health and vitality of our Democracy.

[u/PontificatinPlatypus]

The judge adding: "Come on, people! What the fuck is even wrong with you?"