Federal judge signals support for reviving voter lawsuit in Georgia
ATLANTA - A federal appeals court in Atlanta appears poised to revive a closely-watched legal case involving a controversial mass voter eligibility challenge that took place in Georgia ahead of the 2021 U.S. Senate runoff elections, according to The Associated Press.
What we know:
A three-judge panel from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments Tuesday in a case brought by Fair Fight, a voting rights group founded by former gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams. The group sued Texas-based True the Vote, alleging the nonprofit attempted to intimidate voters by challenging the eligibility of more than 360,000 people ahead of the runoff.
The original case was dismissed last year by U.S. District Judge Steve Jones, who ruled that Fair Fight had failed to prove True the Vote’s actions amounted to voter intimidation under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
During Tuesday’s hearing, two appellate judges—Adalberto Jordan and Federico Moreno—signaled disagreement with the lower court's conclusion. Judge Jordan called the dismissal a "legal error," while Moreno suggested the trial judge had not fully examined all parts of the law.
What they're saying:
The appellate judges expressed concern that the lower court overlooked key aspects of the case. In particular, Judge Jordan stressed that intent alone can support a claim of attempted intimidation: "Attempt does not require success," he noted.
Judge Moreno questioned whether intimidating voters was the real objective behind the challenge and said the appeals court should provide clarity on mass voter eligibility contests in future elections.
True the Vote’s attorney, Jake Evans, defended the group's actions, arguing there was no intent to intimidate and no direct contact between True the Vote’s co-founder, Catherine Engelbrecht, and any of the voters who testified.
Big picture view:
The outcome of this appeal could set a precedent for how far third-party groups can go in challenging voter rolls before elections. With election security and voter suppression continuing to spark national debate, the case raises broader questions about the limits of citizen-led scrutiny and the protections afforded under the Voting Rights Act.
What's next:
The appeals panel has not yet issued a ruling, but Tuesday’s questioning suggests Fair Fight may see its lawsuit revived. If that happens, the case will likely return to district court for further proceedings. In the meantime, the appellate court's decision could influence how courts handle similar voter challenges in upcoming election cycles.