Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney has issued a temporary suspension of a newly implemented rule mandating the hand-counting of paper ballots in Georgia for the forthcoming U.S. federal election. This ruling was delivered during an expedited bench trial, highlighting the urgency of the matter following a series of emergency motions from the involved parties.
The rule, which was ratified by the Georgia State Election Board (SEB) in late September, aimed to ensure electoral transparency and accuracy through manual counting. The hand-counting procedure was to be conducted by a poll manager along with two sworn poll officers who would independently tally all paper ballots at each precinct across the state. The intention behind this procedural mandate was to bolster the security and transparency of the electoral process.
However, the petitioner, the Cobb County Board of Elections and Registration, among others, contested the rule. They sought a legal declaration invalidating this rule, along with several others brought forward by the SEB. The petitioners argued for an interlocutory injunction or an emergency temporary restraining order to halt the implementation of the rule, indicating a possible threat of irreparable harm.
Judge McBurney’s decision to grant the injunction was based on the belief that the rule, being implemented just a week into early voting and two weeks before the federal election, constituted excessive measures at an inconvenient time. As such, for the forthcoming election, standard procedures will remain in place without the inclusion of the hand-counting requirement.
There are significant concerns with hand-counting in terms of time and cost. For instance, in Esmeralda County, Nevada, it took seven hours to tally just 317 ballots during the 2022 primary, according to Verified Voting. Moreover, Mesa County, Colorado, incurred costs of $80,000 for a week-long hand count in 2021.
Presently, the court has yet to render a final verdict on the rule’s permanent validity. The detailed merits of the petitioner’s case will be examined in subsequent proceedings, determining if and how this rule might be applied to future elections.
For further information, please refer to the full article on JURIST.