Georgia appeals court upholds ruling saying election officials must certify results

U.S. Court News

A Georgia appeals court has upheld a lower court ruling that said county election officials in the state must vote to certify results according to deadlines set in law.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney had ruled in October that “no election superintendent (or member of a board of elections and registration) may refuse to certify or abstain from certifying election results under any circumstance.” The ruling stemmed from a lawsuit filed by Republican Fulton County election board member Julie Adams, who abstained from certifying primary election results last year.

A three-judge panel of the Georgia Court of Appeals last week upheld McBurney’s ruling, saying “Adams’ contention that the trial court erred by declaring she had a mandatory duty to certify election results is without merit.”

Certification, an administrative task that involves certifying the number of votes, became a political flashpoint when President Donald Trump tried to overturn his loss to Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 general election. Republicans in several swing states refused to certify results during primary elections last year, and some sued to try to keep from being forced to sign off on election results.

In the run-up to last year’s presidential election, Democrats and some voting rights groups worried that Trump-allied election officials could refuse to certify election results if he were to lose to then-Vice President Kamala Harris. Trump ended up beating Harris.

Georgia law says county election superintendents, which are generally multimember boards, shall certify election results by 5 p.m. on the Monday after an election, or the Tuesday after if Monday is a holiday.

McBurney had written in his order that Georgia law allows county election officials to examine whether fraud has occurred and what should be done about it. They should share any concerns with the appropriate authorities for criminal prosecution or use them to file an election challenge in court, but cannot use their concerns to justify not certifying results, the judge wrote.

The Court of Appeals opinion echoed McBurney’s ruling.

The appeals court also noted that state law limits county election officials’ review of documents to instances when the total number of votes exceeds the total number of voters or ballots and also limits the review to documents related to the relevant precinct. To the extent that McBurney’s ruling allows a more expansive review, the judges sent it back to him for reconsideration.

Related listings

  • Court clears the way for Trump’s plans to downsize the federal workforce

    Court clears the way for Trump’s plans to downsize the federal workforce

    U.S. Court News 07/10/2025

    The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for President Donald Trump’s plans to downsize the federal workforce despite warnings that critical government services will be lost and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will be out of thei...

  • International Criminal Court hit with cyber security attack

    International Criminal Court hit with cyber security attack

    U.S. Court News 07/02/2025

    The International Criminal Court has been targeted by a “sophisticated” cyberattack and is taking measures to limit any damage, the global tribunal announced Monday.The ICC, which also was hit by a cyberattack in 2023, said the latest inc...

  • US communities spanning from red to blue blast Trump sanctuary list

    US communities spanning from red to blue blast Trump sanctuary list

    U.S. Court News 06/11/2025

    State and local officials blasted the Trump administration’s widely anticipated list of “sanctuary” jurisdictions that are deemed uncooperative with federal immigration enforcement, with some of the most enthusiastic supporters of t...

Experienced Business Law Attorneys - Business Law Attorneys in Chicago, Illinois

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that it is clarifying policy guidance (PDF, 71 KB) on the specific work activities its officers should consider when determining whether an individual qualifies for TN nonimmigrant status as an economist.

Companies of all sizes have to deal with a lot of bureaucracy and paperwork just to do business. Long gone are the days of simply designing and manufacturing a great product and putting it out there. It can be incredibly overwhelming trying to do business without making yourself vulnerable to a lawsuit.

If you need to craft an agreement between you and investors or business partners, it is prudent to have it reviewed by a business attorney before you sign anything. You may also want to have your vendor contracts, office leases, sales agreements, and other types of agreements looked over as well. From start-ups to established corporations, the Chicago business attorneys at the Roth Law Group have the know-how to help businesses keep legal trouble at bay.

The attorneys at the Roth Law Group have helped their clients at every stage of the business creation and operation process. From registering as a legally-recognized business entity to hiring employees and then copywriting or trademarking a product idea, the right guidance in the beginning can keep you out of trouble later on.