ATLANTA — Election integrity activists are filing a lawsuit against a federal judge saying Georgia is vulnerable to attacks and has operational issues that could leave voters without the right to vote and have their votes accurately counted. They are seeking an order to stop using the election system.
inside Trial set will start from Tuesdayactivists plan to argue as follows: dominion voting system Touchscreen voting machines are highly defective and unconstitutional.
Election officials insist the system is secure and reliable and that it is up to states to decide how to conduct their elections.
Elections in Georgia have attracted national attention in recent years, making it an important election battleground.
The election system used across the state for nearly all in-person voters includes a touch screen that prints a human-readable summary of the voter's selection and a QR code that is read by a scanner to count the vote. Includes voting machine.
Activists say the state needs to switch to hand-printed paper ballots tabulated by scanners, as well as far more robust post-election audits than are currently in place.
In an October order, U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg, who is overseeing the long-running case, said she could not order states to use hand-marked paper ballots.
But activists argue that banning touchscreen devices would effectively force people to use hand-marked paper ballots, which are an emergency backup required by state law. are doing.
Outlandish conspiracy theories about Dominion voting machines proliferated after the 2020 election, spread by allies of former President Donald Trump who claimed they were used to steal the election from the president.
Election supply companies have aggressively fought back with lawsuits, inter alia $787 million settlement on FOX News in April.
The trial, scheduled to begin Tuesday, stems from a lawsuit that long predates those claims. The bill was originally introduced in 2017 by several individual voters and the Coalition for Good Governance, which advocates for election integrity, and targeted the outdated paperless voting system in use at the time.
totenberg Banned in August 2019 After that year, the state could no longer use outdated machinery.the country agreed buy a new voting machine From Dominion a few weeks ago hastily deployed Ahead of the 2020 election cycle.
Before the machines were distributed across the state, activists amended their lawsuit to read: Aim for a new system.
They argue that the system has significant security vulnerabilities that can go undetected and be exploited, and that the country has done little to address them.
Additionally, voters cannot be sure that their vote is being accurately recorded because they cannot read the QR code.
They also argue that voting machines' large upright screens make it easier for voters to see their choices, violating their right to vote secrecy.
Attorneys for Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said in a recent court filing that he “vehemently disputes” the activists' claims and that their case “has no legal or factual merit.” “I strongly believe that there is no such thing,” he said.
Experts working with activists say there is no evidence that the vulnerability was exploited to change the outcome of the election, but that concerns must be addressed immediately to protect future elections. Says.
One of them, J. Alex Halderman, a computer scientist at the University of Michigan, studied the Georgia machines and wrote a lengthy report detailing vulnerabilities that malicious actors could exploit to attack the systems. I did.
U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), June 2022 issued a recommendation This builds on Halderman's findings, which called on jurisdictions that use the machines to quickly mitigate vulnerabilities.
At a hearing in May, state attorneys told the judge that the physical security elements recommended by CISA were “mostly in place.”However, the Secretary of State's Office says that software updates from Dominion are Installation is too troublesome Before the 2024 election.
After unauthorized parties gained access to election equipment in January 2021, the fact that voting system software and data was uploaded to servers and shared with an unspecified number of people makes it even easier to plan attacks on the system. Halderman said.
that Violations at election offices The incident, which took place in rural Coffee County, was discovered and exposed by the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
a Indicted on vast extortion charges in Fulton County The charges against Trump and 18 others included charges against four people associated with Coffee County.
including two of them Trump ally Sidney Powell, lawyerpled guilty after reaching an agreement with prosecutors.
In several rulings in the case, Totenberg has made it clear that he has concerns about the voting system.
But in October, she wrote that activists “have a heavy burden of proving constitutional violations” related to the voting system and its implementation.
David Cross, an attorney for some individual voters, said judges have seen only a small portion of their evidence so far. She believes she has an advantage in their favor, but she said she doesn't expect to see any change by Georgia's presidential primary in March.
He said if Mr. Totenberg governs quickly, changes could be possible before the November general election.
“We're hopeful, but we recognize that it's going to be a tough battle ahead of 2024,” he said, acknowledging the state could appeal the ruling in favor of the activists.
Marilyn Marks, executive director of the Coalition for Good Governance, was similarly optimistic ahead of the trial. “We have the facts, the science and the law on our side, and the fact is the state has no defense,” she said.
Representatives for Mr. Raffensperger did not respond to multiple requests to speak with someone from his office ahead of the trial.
Activists planned to ask the Secretary of State to testify. They wanted to ask why they chose a voting system that uses QR codes that voters cannot read.
They also believe his office failed to investigate or take appropriate safeguards after the Coffee County violations, and wanted to ask him about the matter under oath.
The judge ordered him to appear in court over his lawyer's objections.
But the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that he did not need to testify, saying the plaintiffs had not shown a need to testify because of his status as a top official.
“This case is very much in the public interest, and voters have a right to hear Chief Justice Raffensperger's opinion in the case. It's a travesty that they won't do that,” Cross said. “And that's unfair to my client, who needs answers to questions that only he can provide at trial.”
