A Georgia judge related to former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams ruled that voters who have changed their address can still vote from their previous address.
“This makes no sense. A judge (the sister of Stacey Abrams) ruled that when someone tells the US Postal Service they have moved they still can vote from their old address,” former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer tweeted. “Rules have no meaning any more. This is nuts.”
This makes no sense. A judge (the sister of Stacey Abrams) ruled that when someone tells the US Postal Service they have moved they still can vote from their old address.
Rules have no meaning any more. This is nuts. https://t.co/X9FUkto3td
— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) December 29, 2020
Fleischer’s tweet came in response to a Politico story about federal Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner, Abrams’s sister, reversing the decisions of voting officials in two counties that invalidated the registrations of people who had filled out change-of-address forms with the U.S. Postal Service.
Muscogee County, which voted overwhelmingly for President-elect Joe Biden, accounted for the majority of the invalidated registrations, with 4,000 voters removed. Ben Hill County, a stronghold of President Trump, saw 150 voters removed.
National Democratic Party attorney Marc Elias filed a suit seeking to overturn the counties’ decisions, claiming the Postal Service data was not a reliable indicator of where a voter lived.
Following the ruling, Elias called Gardner’s decision a “blow to GOP voter suppression.”
“We continue to monitor how other Georgia counties respond to the suppression scheme,” Elias added. “Where necessary, we will sue, and we will win.”
Attorneys for the Muscogee County board sought to have Gardner, an appointee of President Barack Obama, recused from the case because of her relationship to Abrams, who they described as “a Georgia politician and voting rights activist who was the Democratic candidate in the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election and has since engaged in various highly publicized efforts to increase voter registration and turnout for the 2020 general election in Georgia.”
“Abrams’ involvement in the Fair Fight Litigation … is sufficient to satisfy the standard for mandatory judicial recusal,” the board’s attorneys wrote. “Abrams has a clear interest in the outcome of this proceeding and other similarly situated litigation in Georgia due to her voting advocacy through projects such as Fair Fight and the New Georgia Project.”
Gardner noted the request but did not step aside.
“The Court has reviewed the motion and finds no basis for recusal. An Order detailing the Court’s reasoning is forthcoming,” Gardner wrote.
