Case 1:17-cv-02989-AT Document 579 Filed 08/15/19 Page 18 of 153
ES&S15) builds the electronic ballots for use on DREs using the GEMS software,
database, and server. However, the State Defendants have represented that a
municipality may “work with a third-party vendor to build its own ballot.” (Doc.
537 at 2.)
The Court directed the State Defendants to identify these
municipalities, but they failed to do so. (See id.) By allowing a municipality to
contract with a third-party vendor to program and build ballots, the Secretary of
State appears to run afoul of its statutory obligations under Georgia’s election
code (but in any event has implicitly approved the arrangements made by such
municipalities for the 2019 elections).
In response to an inquiry from the Court in April of 2019 regarding the
scope of the anticipated 2019 elections, the State Defendants contended that they
“anticipate[d] that municipal officials will seek to be heard by the Court on any
potential injunctive relief for 2019 and should be heard because of their interest
in this case.” (Doc. 362 at 10.) No municipalities have moved to intervene for
this limited purpose. The State Defendants presented with their response brief a
handful of declarations from county election officials regarding the feasibility of
implementing a change to paper ballots in advance of the Fall 2019 elections.
State Defendants presented no evidence from any of the municipalities that
Elections Systems & Software (“ES&S”) is Georgia’s elections equipment vendor for the
current DRE/GEMS system.
15
18
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents