New Lawsuit Raises Alarms About Absentee Ballot Rejections
The lawsuit contends that too many absentee ballots are being rejected for arbitrary or capricious reasons without voters' knowledge.
October 16, 2018 at 11:19 AM
5 minute read
A new federal lawsuit is sounding more alarms about the security and accuracy of Georgia's midterm election, citing arbitrary and allegedly capricious practices that are causing “unacceptably high” rejections of absentee ballots.
The suit, filed late Monday in federal court in Atlanta, also singles out Gwinnett County for an escalating number of absentee ballot rejections. What was once a majority white bedroom community north of Atlanta has become a predominantly minority county still largely governed by white officials.
The suit contends that 171 African-American voters' ballots were rejected and 66 white voters' ballots were rejected through Oct. 12. It also contends that, while Asian and Pacific Islanders constituted about 15 percent of the mail ballot voters through Oct. 12, 25 percent of those mail ballots were rejected.
The suit was filed amid growing concerns and nationwide publicity about Georgia's antiquated computer voting machines and the outdated infrastructure supporting it. It contends that applications for paper absentee ballots have surged and that many candidates are urging Georgians to vote by mail in order to ensure their ballots are counted.
But that may not be the case, the suit contends. It says that ballots are being rejected for “even the smallest clerical error or a question about a voter's signature,” and if a voter fills in the date he or she signs the ballot rather than their date of birth.
Those determinations are being made without the oversight of supervisors or poll watchers, the lawsuit contends.
Atlanta attorney Bruce Brown filed the complaint on behalf of two Gwinnett County voters, one of whom works for a Democratic candidate for Congress, a Fulton County voter, a Democratic candidate running for a Georgia House district in Gwinnett and the Libertarian candidate for secretary of state. It names Secretary of State Brian Kemp, who is running for governor on the Republican ticket, and members of the state and Gwinnett County election boards as defendants.
Gwinnett County election officials rejected 6 percent of its absentee ballots prior to the 2016 presidential election, according to the complaint. In the May 2018 primary, it rejected 9.6 percent of the ballots, according to the suit. Through Oct. 12, the county has rejected 9.6 percent of the absentee ballots sent in advance of Nov. 6 election.
Meanwhile, Fulton County, the state's most populous county, has rejected no mail ballots as of Oct. 12.
Even though state law requires prompt notification to electors whose absentee ballots are rejected, the suit alleges that any mailed ballots with discrepancies received on or the day before Election Day “would have almost no chance of cure given that, unlike provisional ballots of polling place voters, there are no post-Election Day cure processes that apply to mail ballots.”
Georgia law also forbids voters from personally delivering mail ballots to their home precinct on Election Day and instead requires that they go only to their county's central election office. Georgia law also bars voters from marking their mail ballots on Election Day, even if the ballot is hand-delivered.
The suit seeks an injunction that would direct state election officials to decide within three days of its receipt whether an absentee ballot is defective, notify the voter within 24 hours, send the voter a new application that includes reasons for the prior rejection and instructions on how to cure it.
It seeks to curtail ballot rejections because of signature discrepancies by requiring county election officials to immediately establish bipartisan signature review committees.
The suit also asks that mail ballots not be rejected because of an incorrect or missing date of birth.
“The plaintiffs brought this suit because the Georgia election officials, under the direction of Secretary Kemp, are rejecting perfectly valid ballots from eligible voters for arbitrary and capricious reasons and not giving the voters a reasonable opportunity to fix the perceived mistakes,” Brown said. “These election officials should want and encourage people to vote, and help them cast a vote, but instead some are using everything at their disposal to deny these people–many of them elderly and disabled—this fundamental political right. We hope that Secretary Kemp, rather than fight this lawsuit, simply does the right thing and orders election officials statewide to give mail ballot voters a reasonable opportunity to cure any perceived mistakes in their paperwork.”
Kemp spokeswoman Candice Broce said Tuesday that, under state law, voter eligibility for absentee mail ballots is “solely determined by local officials.”
“The secretary of state cannot and does not make those calls,” she said, adding that the state election board does not make those determinations either.
The Daily Report has contacted Gwinnett County's spokesman for comment on the complaint and is awaiting his reply.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute read'Didn't Notice Patient Wasn't Breathing': $13.7M Verdict Against Anesthesiologists
12 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Who Are the Judges Assigned to Challenges to Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order?
- 2Litigators of the Week: A Directed Verdict Win for Cisco in a West Texas Patent Case
- 3Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 4Womble Bond Becomes First Firm in UK to Roll Out AI Tool Firmwide
- 5Will a Market Dominated by Small- to Mid-Cap Deals Give Rise to a Dark Horse US Firm in China?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250