Several lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of Georgia Senate Bill 9 were argued before the state Supreme Court on Nov. 9.
There were five suits combined into the Tuesday session: Two Black Lives Matter Fund, Inc. vs. Gov. Brian Kemp and others, two responses to those cases and Saunders vs. Gov. Kemp and others.
MORE: Judicial Split is Complete
Attorney Joseph Rhodes, representing BLMF, barely began presenting his arguments when he was interrupted by multiple questions from the justices.
Rhodes began by saying that in November 2020, Jared Williams was elected as the first black district attorney in the Augustan Judicial Circuit, then comprised of Richmond, Columbia and Burke Counties. When the legislative session opened in 2021, state Sen. Lee Anderson, R-Grovetown, introduced a bill splitting Columbia County into its own judicial circuit. It passed and was signed by Kemp.
Chief Justice David Nahmias jumped in to ask if the district attorney was a party in any of the cases. He is not.
[adrotate banner=”51″]
Rhodes was able to finish his presentation in just under 25 minutes. He was followed by attorney Jack Long, representing Willie Saunders.
“I would like to address what I think is the real elephant in the room, and this is race,” began Long.
He said SB9 created a majority black circuit and a majority white circuit, which is wrong. That prompted Justice Verda Colvin, currently the only black justice, to ask how it was racially motivated when it was supported by black and white council members, the mayor and members of the General Assembly.
“For me, that cuts against the argument that it was totally racially motivated, because all of these people who looked like the DA have now said that this is something we want,” Colvin said.
The lawsuits contend the split is a violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Saunders, a resident of Columbia County, voted for Williams. Long contended the split had the effect of nullifying his client’s vote.
MORE: Augusta Commission Approves Judicial Split, Gets ‘Clean’ Audit
Nahmias asked for a precedent saying vote nullification is covered by the Voting Rights Act. Long said he had none but maintained nullification is the same as not allowing someone to vote or by refusing to count a person’s vote.
The state’s responses were made by Senior Assistant Attorney Gen. Russ Willard. He said, under Article 6 of the state constitution, authority is granted to the General Assembly to create, abolish or modify judicial circuits.
“Appellants have consistently mischaracterized both the scope of the Voting Rights Act and its application to the circuit split,” said Willard. “No votes were nullified through SB9. no impediment to the right to vote through voting qualification or practice was created by Senate Bill 9. Nor have the appellant shown any discriminatory effect on voters through the enactment of Senate Bill 9.”
Willard ended by asking the justices to uphold the trial court’s finding that SB9 is not unconstitutional and does not violate the Voting Rights Act.
Chief Justice Nahmias ended the session by saying they will make a decision as soon as possible.
Dana Lynn McIntyre is a Staff Reporter with The Augusta Press. You can reach her at dana@theaugustapress.com
