Secretary of State Battles Sanctions Sought in Paper Ballot Litigation
Attorneys fighting off an attempt to conduct future Georgia elections by paper ballot contend that sanctions sought by lawyers representing two sets of voters and a nonprofit organization aren't warranted.
October 28, 2019 at 04:03 PM
5 minute read
Lawyers defending Georgia's secretary of state in federal litigation against a sought-after return to paper ballots claim that plaintiff voters engaged in "a deluge of innuendo" in seeking more than $300,000 in sanctions against the state.
Special assistant state attorneys general defending Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger and the state elections board contend the requested sanctions are not warranted because they never refused to hand over the obsolete databases still used by the state to create ballots and tabulate votes.
Instead, Raffensperger's lawyers argued in a response objecting to the proposed sanctions that they were bound by state law from releasing 2018 election ballots designed on the Global Election Management System and were required by law to limit disclosure of "other election-related information" without a court order. The lawyers said they released the sought-after databases after Judge Amy Totenberg of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ordered them to do so in July.
Calling the sanctions motion "unnecessary," Raffensperger's legal team claimed the proposed sanctions were "based on the flawed idea that state defendants failed to comply with their discovery obligations." The state's lawyers insisted they "worked in good faith the resolve the legitimate security concerns … involving the GEMS database."
David Cross—a partner at Morrison Foerster in Washington, D.C., who leads a team of attorneys representing one set of Georgia voters who sued the state—said earlier this month that the plaintiffs have sought sanctions because the state "obstructed and obscured discovery" in " a concerted campaign to mislead us, the court, and the public about the fact that Georgia's election management system is neither unique nor confidential."
In Friday's pleading, Raffensperger's counsel also said that if Totenberg decides sanctions are warranted, she should dramatically reduce the requested amount to a maximum of $29,451. They also proposed reducing the hourly rate submitted by Cross—who filed the sanctions motion on behalf of two teams of lawyers representing two sets of plaintiffs—from $1,065 to $266, and Atlanta attorney Bruce Brown's rate from $650 to $375.
Cross is lead counsel for one set of Georgia voters, and Brown is co-lead counsel for a second set of plaintiff voters and the Coalition for Good Governance, a nonprofit election transparency organization.
Attorneys for the state also proposed halving hourly fees for plaintiff election cybersecurity expert Alex Halderman, a professor of computer science and engineering at the University of Michigan, and paying nothing to at least one other cybersecurity expert employed by the plaintiffs.
State lawyers said the suggested reduction in hourly rates submitted by plaintiffs' counsel were in keeping with their own $225 hourly rate as appointed special assistant state attorneys general. They also argued that the judge should consider that any sanctions would be paid with taxpayer dollars.
The three special assistant attorneys general defending Raffensperger—Vincent Russo and Joshua Belinfante, both partners at Atlanta's The Robbins Firm, and Bryan Tyson, a partner at Atlanta's Taylor English Duma—didn't respond to requests for their professional hourly rates in their private practices.
In seeking sanctions, Cross argued they are warranted because Raffensperger falsely claimed in multiple court pleadings and teleconferences that GEMS—which has been in use since 2002 and is no longer supported by Microsoft—is so unique, confidential and sensitive that even the plaintiffs' cybersecurity experts couldn't be trusted with copies in highly secure environments.
The plaintiffs fought for months to examine the state's GEMS server and databases to determine whether they were infected with malware or otherwise compromised while they were left open on the internet for an undetermined period of time by the Center for Elections at Kennesaw State University before and after the 2016 presidential election. At the time, KSU had a contract with then-Secretary of State Brian Kemp, now Georgia's governor, to manage the electronic voting system statewide.
Georgia was one of several states targeted by Russian intelligence officers allegedly seeking to interfere with the election.
State attorneys contend that no malware was detected once the GEMS databases were turned over to the plaintiffs.
The voters' lawyers said that once their cybersecurity experts examined the GEMS databases, they discovered they are exactly like publicly available GEMS databases from other jurisdictions and contained no confidential information. They also said the secrecy the state insisted on for any review of the databases required out-of-state travel by plaintiffs' experts and their lawyers. But the state allowed the same databases to be accessed by three off-site contractors who created the 2018 ballots on their home computers without verifiably secured conditions or confidentiality agreements to safeguard them.
When Totenberg directed the secretary of state to turn over the GEMS databases, she concluded the state failed to provide "practice or reasonable terms" to review and analyze the GEMS databases and the terms they had proposed "would in reality preclude [the] plaintiffs' experts from effectively analyzing the database and its functioning as well as preclude plaintiffs' experts from collecting in writing many of their observations on a real time basis during their review."
In her order, Totenberg also called an analysis of the GEMS databases "highly relevant" to the plaintiffs' claims and a "necessary first step in evaluating security vulnerabilities and flaws in the state GEMS system which have an actual impact on voting tabulations."
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 AllGeorgia Republicans Push to Limit Lawsuits. But Would That Keep Insurance Rates From Rising?
5 minute readA Plan Is Brewing to Limit Big-Dollar Suits in Georgia—and Lawyers Have Mixed Feelings
10 minute readPanel to Decide if Governor Should Suspend Georgia Lawyer From Elected Post
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Lawyers Waging the Legal Fight Against the Trump Administration
- 2McDermott's Onetime London Leader Headed to Pillsbury
- 3A&O Shearman To Lose Another Five Lawyers to EY
- 4Pearl Cohen Enters San Francisco Market Via Combination With IP Boutique
- 5'Incredibly Complicated'? Antitrust Litigators Identify Pros and Cons of Proposed One Agency Act
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