VICTORY: ACLJ’s Defense of Georgia’s Election Integrity Laws Vindicated as Federal Government Dismisses Lawsuit

In a resounding victory for constitutional government, election integrity, and the rule of law, the Trump Administration has dropped a meritless lawsuit against Georgia’s election law.

Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the DOJ to dismiss its lawsuit over Georgia Senate Bill 202 (SB 202), acknowledging that the Biden Administration “falsely accused Georgia of intentionally suppressing Black voters’ votes.”

This complete vindication of Georgia’s election integrity laws – and the dismissal of all federal claims challenging Georgia’s election laws – represents a triumph for the constitutional principles the ACLJ has steadfastly defended since filing our amicus brief in this case on behalf of 57 Members of Congress.

Help us defend election integrity. Add your voice to the petition: Defend Election Integrity and the Constitution.

The Biden Administration’s “Fabricated” Attack on Georgia Exposed

The Justice Department’s own press release reveals the stunning truth: “The Biden administration fabricated an untrue narrative following the passage of Senate Bill 202 and sued the state of Georgia, claiming without evidence that SB 202 was an intentional scheme to ‘depress the Black vote’ and referring to the basic election legislation as ‘Jim Crow 2.0.’”

This admission confirms what the ACLJ argued from the beginning – that this lawsuit was not about protecting voting rights, but about federal overreach designed to prevent states from implementing commonsense election security measures. The Biden DOJ weaponized federal litigation to attack a state for exercising its clear constitutional authority under the Elections Clause.

The results speak for themselves. Attorney General Bondi noted that “Black voter turnout actually increased under SB 202,” completely contradicting the Biden Administration’s unfounded allegations. The reality is that “SB 202’s commonsense reforms – photo ID for all voting, strengthened absentee ballot procedures, and rapid reporting of results – spurred record voter turnout, including among black Georgians.”

This outcome validates every argument the ACLJ made in our brief defending Georgia’s constitutional authority to implement these reasonable, non-discriminatory election security measures. States have a substantial interest in preventing fraud and ensuring election integrity – and the evidence proves these laws accomplished exactly that.

Constitutional Principles Prevail Over Political Theater

The ACLJ’s amicus brief highlighted the fundamental constitutional issue at stake: The Elections Clause gives state legislatures – not federal bureaucrats or activist judges – primary authority to regulate the “times, places, and manner” of elections. From the moment this lawsuit was filed, the ACLJ recognized it as an unconstitutional attack on state sovereignty and election integrity. Our amicus brief, on behalf of 57 Members of Congress and over 647,000 ACLJ supporters, made several key arguments that the case’s dismissal validates:

State Constitutional Authority: We emphasized that the Elections Clause gives states broad authority to regulate elections, including implementing security measures to prevent fraud and ensure integrity. As we said when we filed our brief: “[O]ur brief emphasized that the lawsuit is not about the hotly debated question of what kinds of election regulations should be enacted, but rather who gets to make that decision. The Constitution clearly entrusts that decision to state legislatures, not federal bureaucrats.”

Federal Court Overreach: We warned against federal courts usurping state legislative authority over election administration, noting that such judicial micromanagement “would flout the Constitution’s express commitment of the task to the States.”

Legitimate State Interests: We highlighted Georgia’s compelling interests in election security, fraud prevention, and maintaining public confidence in election integrity – interests that the evidence now proves were well-founded.

Partisan vs. Racial Motives: We argued that partisan disagreement about election policies does not constitute racial discrimination, a principle the DOJ has now explicitly acknowledged.

A New Era of Respect for Constitutional Government

The DOJ’s statement that it is “done with this disgrace” and committed to “dismantling weaponized litigation” signals a return to constitutional governance and respect for state authority. This represents a fundamental shift from the previous Administration’s approach of using federal litigation as a political weapon against states exercising their constitutional powers.

As the DOJ noted, “Instead of wasting time on false, divisive lawsuits, the Department of Justice will continue to root out real discrimination, promote common-sense election safeguards, and ensure equality for every American.”

The ACLJ’s Continuing Mission

This victory in Georgia represents just one battle in the broader fight to preserve our federal system of government and to protect states’ rights while implementing common-sense election security measures.

This Georgia victory builds on the ACLJ’s extensive track record of defending election integrity laws. We’ve challenged unconstitutional changes to election procedures and defended states’ rights to verify voter eligibility. We have been at the forefront of protecting the constitutional framework that governs our elections.

For example, in Beals v. Virginia Coalition for Immigration Rights, the ACLJ filed a crucial amicus brief defending Virginia’s constitutional authority to remove non-citizens from its voter rolls. We argued that states have not only the right, but also the duty, to maintain accurate voter registration lists and ensure that only eligible citizens participate in elections. Our brief emphasized that the Constitution’s Elections Clause gives states primary responsibility for election administration, including the verification of voter eligibility. This case demonstrates the same principles we defended in Georgia – that states must retain their constitutional authority to implement reasonable measures that protect election integrity and maintain public confidence in the electoral process. In that case, the Supreme Court issued a resounding win for election integrity and the ability of states to protect their elections.

This dismissal is not just a victory for Georgia – it’s a victory for every American who believes in constitutional government, election integrity, and the rule of law. The Biden Administration’s “fabricated . . . narrative” has been exposed, and the principle that states have constitutional authority to secure their elections has been vindicated.

As we look ahead, we remain committed to defending election integrity laws across America and ensuring that states retain their constitutional authority to implement the security measures necessary for free and fair elections.