If there is a ground zero for US election trauma, it’s probably Georgia.
It’s the state that gave us the election interference case, the Donald Trump mugshot, and his telephone call to the secretary of state asking for more votes.
The Republican nominee is still among those facing prosecution – although the case has been paused, pending an investigation into the Fulton County District Attorney.
Courts in Georgia are still dealing with the elections.
Legal challenges to the voting system feature among more than 90 cases across America.
They have been brought, primarily, by Republicans who claim a flawed system needs restructuring.
Democrats dismiss it as political theatre, orchestrated by Trump, designed to sow mistrust and chaos.
They point to his repeated claims of “cheaters” as evidence he is laying the ground to challenge any Kamala Harris victory.
Both are gearing up for lengthy court challenges following the election.
Democrats are focused particularly on their expectation that Trump will claim victory on election night prematurely, and task teams of lawyers with litigating a route to the presidency.
Brad Raffensperger, the Republican secretary of state of Georgia, has announced two million people have already engaged in early voting in the state.
Asked by Sky News if Trump’s repeated claims of cheating in the 2024 election process had been helpful, he replied voters should refer any concerns to him.
“It doesn’t phase me,” he said. “I just continue to put my head down and do my job. I think if people want to find out what’s really going on, just ask Brad.”
In recent days a Georgia judge has rejected as “illegal, unconstitutional, and invalid” an attempt by Republicans to enforce new practices in the election process.
They included the hand-counting of votes and the right to examine any election-related documentation “prior to the certification of results”.
Opponents said the documents could have involved anything from training manuals to poll watcher credentials – they dismissed the legal action as a spurious effort to undermine faith in the legitimacy of election results.
Janelle King, a Republican member of the Georgia State Election Board, has supported legal challenges.
She, along with fellow Republicans on the board, which oversees the state’s elections, were dubbed by Trump as “pit bulls fighting for honesty, transparency, and victory”.
Asked whether her actions encouraged disruption and delay, she told Sky News: “I would say that that’s all hypothetical, just like his statement is.
“There’s nothing that would indicate that that will happen.
“I think what causes people to distrust the election is when you present a proposal of rules that you feel will strengthen the election process, and then a judge who has no clue about our election process tells us it’s unconstitutional.
“That’s what causes distrust in the election process.”
The election process
Following the US election on 5 November, the counting of votes will designate so-called “electors”, charged with affirming the voters’ choice in the respective states.
On 17 December, the electors meet in their respective state houses and register the vote for their chosen candidate.
On or before 3 January 2025, when the new Congress assembles, the electors’ certificates are sent to Capitol Hill.
On 6 January 2025, Congress meets in session to certify the election and declare who has won the election.
On 20 January 2025 – Inauguration Day – the president-elect and vice president-elect take the Oath of Office and become president and vice president of the United States.
Read more:
Trump reaches new extremes – but will it matter to voters?
Why Trump biopic is unwelcome surprise for his campaign
The dates are “pinch-points” in the process, liable to legal challenge.
A febrile political environment would raise the spectre of acrimony, protest, and violence of the recent past.
At the very least, it would create uncertainty.
Ezra Rosenberg, director of the non-partisan Voting Rights Project which exists to defend the right to vote, told Sky News: “It could be that some of these suits are being brought knowing that they’re going to lose, and maybe they’re setting up a post-election challenge of some sort. I have no idea.
“What bothers me more is that we put an iota of uncertainty in the mind of eligible voters as to whether or not they’re about to vote and that just should not be permitted to happen.”