Brad Raffensperger slams the challenge to the controversial Georgia state election law as “reckless”

On Wednesday, before the two runoff elections to be held next week, a federal judge refused to block the contested part of Georgia’s new controversial election law. The decision was criticized and praised by voting rights activists. Republicans Hope to keep the election rules reform.

Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger stated that this was just “another in a series of boring lawsuits” against the state’s election law, adding, “We will continue to meet with them and in court Beat them.”

However, the ruling of the U.S. District Judge JP Boulee does not rule out the possibility of future elections. The Republican-backed law has become a source of anger for election integrity activists. Democratic Party And others who believe that the law creates unnecessary obstacles to voting, especially for people of color.

Most lawsuits challenging the legislation, including the lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice last month, challenge what critics of the law say constitute a threat to voting rights.

For more reports from the Associated Press, please read on.

Election integrity activists have asked Boulee to prohibit the state from enforcing the part of the new law related to observing elections, as well as a new deadline for absent ballots. Their request came from one of eight federal lawsuits challenging the new law.

The targeted demands that led to Wednesday’s ruling did not focus on the most frequently criticized parts of the law. The clauses in question are mainly related to monitoring or filming certain parts of the election process.

Activists led by the Good Governance Coalition said the questioned part of the law criminalizes normal election observation activities and may intimidate voters, election observers and members of the news media. They argued that stricter deadlines for absentee voting requests make it almost impossible to absentee voting for runoff requests.

The state’s lawyers countered that these regulations strengthen the protections already in place, which are necessary for election integrity.

Two state House of Representatives hold special elections on June 15 Runoff will be held Tuesday. Boulee wrote in his ruling that making changes now may “disrupt the management of ongoing elections.”

Marilyn Marks, executive director of the Good Governance Alliance, said she was disappointed that the challenged clause would take effect in the final next week. “This would bring all the dangers to the integrity and transparency of the election.” But she said she was very disappointed. I’m glad that Boulee’s orders are limited to the finals in July.

The clause in question prohibits observers: deliberately observing voters in a certain way so that they can see how that person voted; reporting to anyone other than election officials anything they saw during the processing of absent ballots; estimating or counting absenteeism The number of ballots or any ballots on the absent ballot; the touch screen of the voting machine when the voter is voting, or the ballots that have been voted.

The last clause that was challenged set a deadline for applications for absentee voting 11 days before the election.

Boulee presided over all eight lawsuits challenging the state’s new laws.he Hold a hearing The scope of the discussion last week was narrow because activists demanded urgent interim rulings on these parts of the law. There are no similar demands in other lawsuits for immediate action.

Boulee stated in his order that he believes there is a problem with the timing of the case.This Law signed He pointed out that in late March, a request was made to block these regulations the day before the special election for the House of Representatives.

He wrote that the law is now in effect, is prohibited from being enforced, and “will change the law in the ninth bureau.” But he said he reserved his judgment on the appropriateness of measures to prevent any challenged part of the law in future elections.