The Supreme Court reinstated a federal judge’s ruling on Friday, issuing a temporary order holding that Georgia‘s current election system disadvantages black voters in violation of a federal civil rights law.
The justices issued their unsigned order in response to an emergency request filed by a group of black voters who challenged the state’s “at large” method for selecting members of Georgia’s Public Service Commission, which oversees the prices of electricity and other utilities. The elections for two of the commission seats will be postponed to allow the installation of a new system for electing commissioners, according to court documents.
The Supreme Court returned the case to the intermediate appeals court, allowing the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to apply a more rigorous legal analysis of Georgia officials’ stay request.
SUPREME COURT COULD BOLSTER STATES’ AUTHORITY OVER ELECTIONS AHEAD OF 2024 RACE
Attorneys for Brad Raffensperger, the secretary of state who defended the current system, vowed not to argue on the Purcell principle, which discourages federal court actions that would disrupt election planning close to an election, if they lost their legal battle.
Each of the five commission seats is assigned a specific district where the commissioner must reside, though the commissioners themselves are elected in statewide elections on a staggered six-year calendar. Black voters represent a majority in one district and prompted a group from that area to sue, arguing election commissioners in a statewide election violated the Voting Rights Act by limiting their ability to elect candidates of their preference.
Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Steven Grimberg ruled that Georgians’ inability to elect commissioners by district directly violated the VRA.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“While delaying elections for Districts 2 and 3 until a later date will regrettably cause disruption to the candidates currently running for those offices, the court does not find that such disruption outweighs the important VRA interests that are implicated,” Grimberg wrote.
The high court’s order marked a rare occasion by the 6-3 Republican-appointed supermajority of justices, as the court typically opts not to make late changes to state election procedures, even if challenges claim adjustments are necessary to address infringements of civil rights laws.
