On March 25, several Georgia groups that promote voter registration filed a federal lawsuit against SB 202, the omnibus election law bill that was signed into law on March 25. The New Georgia Project v Raffensperger, n.d., 1:21cv-1229. The case is assigned to U.S. District Court Judge J. P. Boulee, a Trump appointee. Here is the Complaint.

The lawsuit does not challenge the implementation of ranked choice voting for overseas voters. The Complaint is somewhat vague about exactly what provisions are being challenged. It says on page four that the bill “drastically cuts the mandatory early voting period for runoff elections”, but the Complaint does not say that the date of the run-off itself is being challenged.

The case clearly challenges these laws: (1) absentee ballot requests must include a copy of I.D.; (2) the use of portable polling facilities, which even under the old law were only used in emergencies, such as the electricity going off at a polling place; (3) drop boxes for receipt of absentee ballots that are outside and available around the clock; (4) forbids the state from distributing absentee ballot requests that are unsolicited; (5) prohibits voter registration groups from returning absentee ballot applications; (6) forbids anyone other than polling place officials from offering water or food to voters standing in line waiting to vote; (7) forbids letting a voter use a provisional ballot at a polling place that is different from that voter’s own polling place, before 5 p.m.; (8) makes it easier for challengers to try to stop a voter from voting; (9) cut early voting hours for run-off elections.

On Thursday, March 25, the Georgia Senate passed the House version of SB 202, and shortly afterwards, Governor Brian Kemp signed it.

Here is a news story about the bill, which changes many election laws.

Although the bill has no changes to ballot access law, it will affect ballot access indirectly. The Georgia Libertarian Party has been suing the state over the ballot access restrictions for U.S. House, ever since 2017. The case is still in U.S. District Court, and is fully briefed. Cowen v Rafensperger, n.d., 1:17cv-4660. The state’s chief argument for its restrictions is that if minor parties and independent candidates can get on the November ballot for U.S. House, that will increase the number of U.S. House races which need a runoff. In Georgia, if no one gets 50% of the vote, there must be a runoff. Obviously when the state only permits two candidates on the ballot (which is the case), there is no need for a runoff, except in the extremely unlikely possibility of a strong write-in candidate.

The state says it is very undesirable to hold a runoff for Congress, because runoffs can’t be held until January of the year after the election, so a Georgia member of congress elected in a runoff doesn’t even get to Congress until after that session of Congress has started. But SB 202 changes the runoff schedule. The new law says runoffs will be only four weeks after the November election, not nine weeks. This compressed schedule is achieved by using ranked choice voting for overseas absentee ballots. So now, the state’s main argument for the ballot access restrictions is eliminated.