Michael Huber 
Voting rights activists sounded the alarm Tuesday as the GOP-controlled election board in Georgia approved a measure on Tuesday that could allow local officials to dispute county election results.
Under the new rule, according to The New York Times, local officials can investigate election results to ensure they are “a true and accurate accounting of all votes cast.”
The language, the Times reported, implies local officials have some discretion in the certification process, bucking decades of state law.
Marc Elias, of the group Democracy Docket, which advocates for protecting voter rights, wrote on X: “On a huge news day, this is a very big deal. Please pay attention.”
Republicans, he said in a separate post, are “plotting to subvert our elections and undermine free and fair elections.”
Elias has warned that Republicans will try to use the certification process to ensure former President Donald Trump retakes the White House — even if he loses.
Kristin Nabers, state director of the voting rights group All Voting Is Local Action, said certification inconsistencies can “tie up both the counties and the state in expensive and time-consuming litigation.”
Read also: Elections expert warns ‘loyalty’ to Trump ‘stronger’ than ‘instinct for self-preservation’
“This could result not only in counties missing the certification deadline but also in undermining public trust and confidence in our elections,” she said, according to the Times.
At the meeting, Sara Tindall Ghazal, the only Democratic member of the elections board, opposed the rule and called a “reasonable inquiry” too vague and ripe for “exploitation.”
The rule also runs afoul of state law, she said.
“The statute still mandates that counties certify by 5 p.m. on Monday [after the election], and they will be in violation of state law if they refuse to certify,” Ghazal said, according to Democracy Docket.
State Sen. Jason Esteves wrote in a letter that the rules “create avenues for malicious actors to disrupt the election process under the guise of addressing discrepancies and could be exploited to sow doubt and distress and election outcomes.”
