Georgia’s gubernatorial campaign has remained surprisingly stable since the beginning of the general election season. Democrat Stacey Abrams was supposed to represent a tough opponent for Gov. Brian Kemp, who is running for a second term. That hasn’t materialized, with Abrams never leading in any poll and Kemp currently 6.6 percent ahead in the RealClearPolitics average.
Abrams thought she had one trick left up her sleeve, though. Namely, a lawsuit filed by her “voting rights” organization seeking to strike down parts of Georgia’s election system under the guise of “voter suppression.” Changing election laws at the eleventh hour has become a favorite tactic of the left, especially after they did so in 2020 with such success. No doubt, Abrams was hoping to open the floodgates of no accountability just prior to November.
Unfortunately for her, a federal judge appointed by Barack Obama ruled that nothing about Georgia’s election system violates the US Constitution or the Voting Rights Act.
A federal judge delivered a decisive ruling Friday against allies of Democrat Stacey Abrams in their 4-year-old voting rights lawsuit, upholding Georgia election laws on all counts in the case Fair Fight Action filed days after the 2018 election.
U.S. District Judge Steve Jones’ judgment concludes the ambitious case against Georgia’s voter registration and absentee ballot practices after a trial in which voters testified about problems at the polls but few of them were unable to cast a ballot.
“Although Georgia’s election system is not perfect, the challenged practices violate neither the Constitution nor the VRA (Voting Rights Act),” Jones wrote in a 288-page order.
The decision followed what is believed to be the longest voting rights trial in the history of the Northern District of Georgia, lasting 21 days with testimony from over 50 witnesses, wrote Jones, a nominee of President Barack Obama.
This was a no-brainer. Georgia’s election system is actually more open than places like New York and Delaware. There was never any argument that it was somehow nefariously suppressing the votes of Black Americans. Basic guidelines on voter registration and signature matching are not discriminatory, and to suggest such is itself discriminatory.
In his decision, the judge summed things up perfectly by noting that Abrams and her organization were not able to provide a single piece of direct evidence showing a single voter was prevented from voting due to Georgia’s system.
“The court finds that the burden on voters is relatively low,” Jones wrote about the “exact match” rules. “Here, plaintiffs have not provided direct evidence of a voter who was unable to vote, experienced longer wait times, was confused about voter registration status.”
Laughably, Abrams took to social media after the ruling to claim victory. No, I’m not kidding. Just like in 2018, she is going to try to pretend she won when she objectively lost.
Apparently, she thinks it’s a victory to decisively lose a lawsuit just because her hand-chosen “witnesses” got to tell their stories, even though those stories did not turn out to provide any evidence of what was being claimed. It’s hilarious and pathetic at the same time. Abrams is a woman who has consistently failed up in her life, and apparently, gaslighting has become second nature for her.
She’s not fooling anyone, though. She lost here. She lost big time. Those “changes to voting laws” she is citing came in the form of a Republican election security bill. Oh yeah, and she lost trying to challenge that as well. In short, Abrams is a loser, and she’s going to be a loser again in November against Kemp.