This browser is not actively supported anymore. For the best passle experience, we strongly recommend you upgrade your browser.
| 1 minute read

"11th Circ. Vacates Poll Book Ruling In Ga. Election Case," Law 360

On Wednesday, October 5, the Eleventh Circuit abandoned a ruling requiring the state of Georgia to print paper poll book backups after early voting has concluded. The ruling found that the state's current procedures do not "severely burden the right to vote." Due to this, they must be left to policymakers, not the court.

Taylor English's Bryan P. Tyson, Bryan F. Jacoutot and Diane F. LaRoss represented the defendants in this case. 

The district court reasoned that the paper backups would allow lists to be printed and used to issue ballots in the event of voting machine failures, which have caused hours-long lines in recent elections. 

However, the Eleventh Circuit said the plaintiffs challenging the state's procedures were unable to accurately prove that the long lines were a viable factor to the state's paper backup list and that it does not include any of the  updated information covering the last several days of early voting. 

"Perhaps on a blank slate this would be a reasonable idea," the appeals court said. "Or perhaps the state is right that the administrative burdens of the later print date outweigh the benefits. Either way, because the plaintiffs did not show that the state's current print-date policies severely burden the right to vote, deciding which policy to implement is not our call."

In conclusion, the court dismissed the rest of the state's appeal over the district court's decision to side with the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs decided that the state's ballot scanners should be set to recognize, or at least flag for review, even very slight marks on the ballots.

"These changes mean that a newly formed company, after [Jan. 1, 2024] is going to have to pull together all the information for its beneficial ownership report and also get its TIN done within that 30 calendar day window, said Wilson.

To read the full article subscribers may click here

"If federal courts were to flyspeck every election rule and apply strict scrutiny no matter how limited the burden on voters, our enforcement practices would bar states from carrying out their constitutional responsibility to prescribe election rules," the appeals court said.

Tags

tyson_bryan, jacoutot_bryan, laross_diane, news