Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Kemp's scrapping of a Georgia election was OK, top court says

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp

Georgia's top court ruled Gov. Brian Kemp can appoint a new Supreme Court justice, rather than hold an election.

Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images

It turns out Gov. Brian Kemp can cancel an election and fill a vacancy through an appointment — at least in the case of the soon-to-be open seat on the Georgia Supreme Court.

Last week, the court ruled 6-2 that state officials could not be compelled to hold an election for Justice Keith Blackwell's seat after he steps down, so Kemp could go ahead with his appointment.

This move has opened up the Republican governor to more criticism that he'd rather stack the court with another conservative justice than allow Georgia voters to have their say.


Georgia law allows the governor to fill vacancies when justices leave in the middle of their term. In late February, Blackwell announced he would not seek re-election, but wouldn't leave his post until November, just a few weeks before the end of his term.

Initially a judicial election was scheduled, but that plan was scrapped after a week when Kemp said he would name the replacement himself. This will be Kemp's second court appointment.

When the election was called off, two would-be candidates for the court seat — John Barrow, a former Democratic congressman from Athens, and Beth Baskin, a former Republican state legislator from Atlanta — sued to get the contest reinstated, arguing what Kemp and Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger did was illegal. After losing in state court, they appealedto the Georgia Supreme Court, but again the court did not rule in their favor.

"Even if Justice Blackwell's office is not vacant yet, if his accepted resignation will undoubtedly create a vacancy in his office on November 18, his term of office will go with him, and the next six-year term of his office that would begin on January 1, 2021, will never exist," Justice David Nahmias wrote in the majority opinion.

Justice Brenda Holbert Trammell wrote in the dissent that she is not against gubernatorial appointments, as she is one.

"However, in this instance, when the resignation will not result in a vacancy in the office until (originally) almost six months after the election, I cannot in good conscience agree that the election should be cancelled and the will of the people thrust aside as 'fruitless and nugatory,'" she wrote.

Kemp's list of potential appointees has been whittled down to four finalists: Judge Sara Doyle of the Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge C. LaTain Kell of Cobb County Superior Court, Judge Shawn LaGrua of Fulton County Superior Court and Judge J. Wade Padgett of the Augusta Circuit Superior Court.


Read More

People at voting booths.

A clear breakdown of voter ID laws under the Constitution, federal statutes, and court rulings—plus analysis of new Trump administration proposals to impose nationwide voter identification requirements.

Getty Images, LPETTET

Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits

The Fulcrum approaches news stories with an open mind and skepticism, presenting our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.


Few issues generate more heat and are less understood than voter ID.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

An analysis of Trump’s SAVE Act strategy, the voter ID debate, and how Pew data is being misused—exploring election integrity, voter suppression, and the political fight shaping U.S. democracy.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Stop Fighting Voter ID. Start Defining It.

President Trump doesn't need the SAVE America Act to pass. He only needs the debate to continue. Every minute spent arguing about voter suppression repeats the underlying premise — that noncitizen voting is a real and widespread problem — until it feels like an established fact. The question is whether Democrats will contest Republicans’ definition before the frame hardens.

Trump's claim that 88% of Americans support the bill traces to a Pew Research Center survey — a survey that found 83% support a “government-issued photo ID to vote,” not extreme vetting for proof of citizenship. That support included 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats, indicating genuine, broad, bipartisan support for a basic civic principle. That's worth taking seriously.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less