Judge Rules Against Stacey Abrams in Voting Rights Lawsuit

A federal judge on Friday ruled against an organization founded by Stacey Abrams that argued Georgia’s election laws violated constitutional rights, ending a four-year legal battle that began after she lost the governor’s race in 2018.

Shortly after her defeat to Gov. Brian Kemp (R-GA), Abrams created Fair Fight Georgia, an organization that filed a lawsuit seeking to make changes to the state’s election system, arguing it suppressed voter turnout that led to Abrams’s loss. However, U.S. District Court Judge Steve Jones rejected those claims on Friday, ruling the state’s election processes are constitutional.

STACEY ABRAMS REJECTS COMPARISON OF REFUSAL TO CONCEDE IN 2018 TO TRUMP’S 2020 CLAIMS

“Although Georgia’s election system is not perfect, the challenged practices violate neither the constitution nor the VRA,” Jones wrote in his 288-page decision. “Having held a non-jury trial and considered the evidence and arguments of the parties, for the foregoing reasons, the Court finds IN FAVOR of Defendants and against Plaintiffs.”

Abrams, who is now seeking a rematch against Kemp for the governor’s seat in November, denounced the decision, arguing that “there’s no denying voter suppression under Brian Kemp and [Secretary of State] Brad Raffensperger.”

“During this suit, more than 3,000 voters shared their stories, creating an unprecedented and lasting record of voter testimony, which highlighted the suppressive effects of the Secretary of State’s actions on vulnerable voters,” Abrams said in a tweet. “As governor, I will expand the right to vote. I will defend minority voters, not bemoan their increased power or grow ‘frustrated’ by their success. This case demonstrates that the 2022 election will be a referendum on how our state treats its most marginalized voices.”

In the 2018 lawsuit, Abrams accused Kemp, who was then Georgia’s secretary of state, of using his position to administer the election improperly, arguing Georgia’s election laws unfairly discriminated against voters of color. The lawsuit also sought to argue that the laws violated the constitution due to a state rule that marks voter registration forms as “pending” if the information does not match the information on record from the Department of Driver Services or the Social Security Administration.

The lawsuit was later updated in 2020 to add Raffensperger as a defendant, and he denounced the lawsuit, arguing it was based on unfounded claims.

Kemp praised the judge’s decision, calling the lawsuit an attempt from Abrams to “line her pockets, sow distrust in our democratic institutions, and build her own celebrity.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Abrams’s loss in 2018 catapulted the Democrat into the national spotlight after she refused to concede to Kemp, arguing voter suppression unfairly led to her defeat. Those comments have come back to haunt Abrams as she once again seeks to win the governor’s mansion, with Republicans likening her comments to former President Donald Trump’s claims of a stolen election, which have been dubbed “the Big Lie” among Democrats.

As such, those on the Right have attempted to tie Abrams to Trump, accusing the Democratic nominee of crafting the original messaging. Abrams has rejected that notion, arguing her refusal to concede was based on a lack of voter access rather than a claim that an election was outright fraudulent, noting her goal was not to overturn the results of the race.