A new rule in Georgia could allow local election boards to refuse to certify results

ATLANTA — A new rule in Georgia could allow some local election boards to refuse to certify results, raising concerns ahead of November’s election in the crucial swing state.

It’s the latest partisan flashpoint in a battleground state over certification — a step in the election process that’s usually ministerial and routine.

Local boards confirm the number of voters who cast ballots matches up with the total votes. Legal challenges to results are heard in the courts.

But when it came to certifying the May primary in Fulton County, which includes Atlanta, one board member refused.

“It’s time to fix the problems in our elections by ensuring compliance with the law, transparency in elections conduct and accuracy in results,” Republican Julie Adams said before abstaining from the vote.

Adams said she didn’t have access to enough underlying election records to verify the vote herself. Adams’ colleagues overruled her and the May certification went ahead.

But for some, it signaled a worrying trend. Adams is one of several local officials in Georgia who declined to certify results this year — and that number could grow.

The new state rule allows local boards to conduct "reasonable inquiry" before certifying results. The measure passed 3-2, backed by Republicans with the sole Democrat and nonpartisan chair opposed.

“If I’m going to ask a county election worker to sign their name on a legal document saying this is accurate, when in fact they may see there is some discrepancy, then we’re setting them up for failure,” says Janelle King, a Republican on the state board who voted for the rule.

But some election experts worry a local board member, driven by unsupported claims of election fraud, might refuse to certify if they argue they could not conduct that inquiry or say it turned up problems.

Adams is currently suing her own Fulton County board, asking the courts for a ruling affirming that local election boards do have discretion not to certify an election. Adams serves as a regional coordinator for the Election Integrity Network, a group founded by Cleta Mitchell, who was involved in former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election result.

Adams declined an interview, citing the ongoing litigation.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican who’s drawn Trump’s ire for refuting his false election claims, says refusing to certify election results is not an option.

“We fully anticipate that counties will follow the law,” he wrote on X.

Sara Tindall Ghazal, the state board’s only Democrat, says it is not surprising her colleagues would approve a rule in conflict with state law. Since 2020, she says mainstream Republican lawyers have been gradually replaced on the board by more activist appointees motivated by distrust in recent elections.

“All of our decision-making was driven by our interpretation and application of the law, which is not always going to be the same. Lawyers disagree all the time,” Ghazal says. “Slowly but surely the makeup has changed.”

That shift was highlighted at a Saturday campaign rally in Atlanta when Trump praised the state election board’s three Republicans by name.

“They’re on fire. They’re doing a great job,” Trump said. “Janice Johnston, Rick Jeffares and Janelle King, three people are all pitbulls fighting for honesty, transparency and victory.”

Ghazal says that language was striking. “When you have partisans openly crowing that their appointees are going to lead to their victory, that undermines public confidence in the process,” she says.

King pushed back on any suggestion that the former president’s approval dictates her votes as a board member.

“I don’t make decisions based on which side of the aisle wants me to do something,” King says. “I look at the facts, I look at the evidence, I look at what’s in front of me and I see if this is a good rule, is it going to continue to secure our elections or not.”

At this month’s meeting, the board’s Republicans also advanced rule changes around ballot drop boxes, ballot counting, poll watchers and memory cards, three months before the election. Ghazal says the board is also planning to consider a more sweeping rule on certification at a meeting in August.

Since 2020, efforts to halt certification have cropped up more regularly in swing states like Michigan, Arizona, Nevada and Pennsylvania.

Though these attempts failed when state officials or courts stepped in, Lauren Miller Karalunas, counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice who has extensively studied certification, says these moves still cause harm.

“Disrupting certification by even a few days can make it challenging for state election officials,” Miller Karalunas says. “And they also have to divert scarce resources to figuring out these issues at a time when they are already overburdened and trying to administer a presidential election.”

Any delays could cause even more disruption in a presidential election year, Miller Karalunas says, when officials also face tight deadlines for the Electoral College.

“Even if these refusals aren’t successful, each time someone refuses to certify or disrupt certification, it increases distrust when false information is already fueling things like threats and harassment against election officials,” she says.