American Oversight Demands Georgia Election Board Members Address Court Filing Made Without Public Process

Tuesday, we sent a demand letter to three members of the Georgia State Election Board (SEB) calling on them to publicly address their potentially improper filing of an amicus brief supporting the Trump administration’s seizure of 2020 election-related materials in Fulton County. We urged SEB to answer questions about the brief at this week’s meeting, and warned that we are reserving our right to pursue further action as additional facts come to light.

Our letter also raised serious concerns that a majority of the board — Janice Johnston, Janelle King, and Salleigh Grubbs — may have gathered outside of a properly noticed public meeting regarding the brief, in potential violation of Georgia’s Open Meetings Act. It details how the filing appears to present positions as if they reflect those of the board itself, despite no public vote or deliberation. The trio’s amicus brief was submitted in Pitts v. United States. In the filing, the members describe themselves as representing a “majority” of the existing SEB and weigh in on issues directly tied to the board’s statutory responsibilities.

“Georgians have a right to know how decisions related to their elections are being made. This is not the first time we’ve had to remind members of the State Election Board that those decisions must be made according to a specific legal process,” said our Deputy Executive Director Liz Hempowicz. “It appears that a majority of State Election Board members coordinated official business in secret and then presented it publicly in a way that suggests it reflects the views of the board itself. That kind of conduct cuts directly against Georgia’s open meetings law and the public’s right to know how State Election Board decisions are made. It is especially troubling that those actions are used to advance conspiratorial election claims under the guise of official duties, without following required legal processes. These actions demand a full public accounting. The law is clear, and the public deserves answers.”

Under Georgia law, three members of the SEB constitute a quorum, and any gathering of a quorum to discuss or conduct official business must be publicly noticed. The demand letter explains that the circumstances surrounding the filing raise a reasonable inference that such a gathering occurred without notice to the public or to the other two board members.

The letter further details how the filing itself demonstrates that the subject matter constitutes official board business, including references to investigating election “irregularities,” fulfilling statutory duties, and ongoing board-related matters. In addition to potential violations of open meetings requirements, we also raised concerns about the appearance of impropriety. The filing uses official titles and contact information and asserts positions in ways that suggest they reflect the views of the board as a whole, despite no formal authorization or public process.

This is not the first time we have taken the SEB to task for an apparent violation of the state’s Open Meetings Act. In July 2024, we sued the SEB after three board members — Johnston, King, and Rick Jeffares — convened an illegal meeting, in violation of the Open Meetings Act, to consider controversial proposals. The litigation remains active following our October 2025 victory in the Georgia Court of Appeals.

Additionally, in November 2025, we announced a settlement in a different lawsuit against the SEB and board member Johnston, resolving claims that Johnston had significantly delayed responses to our public records requests in the run-up to the 2024 election by refusing to allow SEB staff to access her official emails.