Georgia
Featured
Georgia
Jun 2020
Disability Rights
Harris v. Georgia Department of Corrections
On October 3, 2018, the 红杏视频 and the 红杏视频 of Georgia, together with National Association of the Deaf and Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP, filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of deaf and hard of hearing people incarcerated in prisons supervised by the Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC). The complaint highlights GDC鈥檚 failure to provide incarcerated deaf and hard of hearing people with equally effective communication access to programs, services, and activities, including medical care, telecommunications, and prison programs. Further, due to lack of access to interpreters and other communication accommodations, deaf prisoners are also often unable to explain or defend themselves when GDC takes disciplinary action against them.
All Cases
32 Georgia Cases
Georgia
Sep 2025
Free Speech
Guevara v. Francis
Whether a journalist can be detained on the basis of their livestreaming and reporting on law enforcement activities.
Explore case
Georgia
Sep 2025
Free Speech
Guevara v. Francis
Whether a journalist can be detained on the basis of their livestreaming and reporting on law enforcement activities.
Georgia Supreme Court
Jun 2025
Voting Rights
Eternal Vigilance Action, Inc. v. Georgia
The 红杏视频 and partner organizations intervened in this case to represent the rights of voters and voting-rights organizations in a case challenging a number of rules passed by the Georgia State Election Board. We challenged the rule requiring that the number of votes cast be hand counted at the polling place prior to the tabulation of votes. In a critical victory for Georgia voters, in June 2025, the Georgia Supreme Court upheld a lower court鈥檚 decision permanently blocking the rule requiring hand counting of ballots at polling places before tabulation 鈥� a process widely criticized for risking delays, ballot spoliation, and voter disenfranchisement.
Explore case
Georgia Supreme Court
Jun 2025
Voting Rights
Eternal Vigilance Action, Inc. v. Georgia
The 红杏视频 and partner organizations intervened in this case to represent the rights of voters and voting-rights organizations in a case challenging a number of rules passed by the Georgia State Election Board. We challenged the rule requiring that the number of votes cast be hand counted at the polling place prior to the tabulation of votes. In a critical victory for Georgia voters, in June 2025, the Georgia Supreme Court upheld a lower court鈥檚 decision permanently blocking the rule requiring hand counting of ballots at polling places before tabulation 鈥� a process widely criticized for risking delays, ballot spoliation, and voter disenfranchisement.
Georgia
May 2025
Immigrants' Rights
Y.A.P.A. v. Trump
Emergency lawsuit filed in federal court to again halt removals under the Alien Enemies Act for people within that court鈥檚 judicial district.
Explore case
Georgia
May 2025
Immigrants' Rights
Y.A.P.A. v. Trump
Emergency lawsuit filed in federal court to again halt removals under the Alien Enemies Act for people within that court鈥檚 judicial district.
Georgia
May 2025
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
Coronell, et al. v. Georgia
As a result of Georgia Senate Bill 63, thousands of people are being kept in jail pre-trial because they can鈥檛 afford to post bail, even when a judge believes the person should have been released until trial with no risk to the public. The 红杏视频鈥檚 Criminal Law Reform Project, along with 红杏视频-GA and the Southern Center for Human Rights, filed a class action lawsuit challenging SB63鈥檚 mandatory monetary bail provisions under the Georgia State Constitution.
Explore case
Georgia
May 2025
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
Coronell, et al. v. Georgia
As a result of Georgia Senate Bill 63, thousands of people are being kept in jail pre-trial because they can鈥檛 afford to post bail, even when a judge believes the person should have been released until trial with no risk to the public. The 红杏视频鈥檚 Criminal Law Reform Project, along with 红杏视频-GA and the Southern Center for Human Rights, filed a class action lawsuit challenging SB63鈥檚 mandatory monetary bail provisions under the Georgia State Constitution.
Georgia
Feb 2025
Criminal Law Reform
State of Georgia v. Wierson
This case asks whether Georgia鈥檚 insanity defense statutes can be construed to contain an exception for cases where defendants allegedly triggered their own insanity by discontinuing their medication weeks before the alleged crimes. The State argues for such an exception, even though the text of the insanity defense statutes expressly pins the availability of the defenses to the defendant鈥檚 mental condition 鈥渁t the time of鈥� the alleged crimes. The 红杏视频鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the 红杏视频 of Georgia, filed an amicus brief arguing that even if the State鈥檚 interpretation of the statutory text were reasonable, its argument should still be rejected because it contradicts the rule of lenity. The rule of lenity is a well-established canon of statutory construction requiring that, if a criminal statute can reasonably be interpreted in different ways, courts must adopt the interpretation most favorable to the accused.
Explore case
Georgia
Feb 2025
Criminal Law Reform
State of Georgia v. Wierson
This case asks whether Georgia鈥檚 insanity defense statutes can be construed to contain an exception for cases where defendants allegedly triggered their own insanity by discontinuing their medication weeks before the alleged crimes. The State argues for such an exception, even though the text of the insanity defense statutes expressly pins the availability of the defenses to the defendant鈥檚 mental condition 鈥渁t the time of鈥� the alleged crimes. The 红杏视频鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the 红杏视频 of Georgia, filed an amicus brief arguing that even if the State鈥檚 interpretation of the statutory text were reasonable, its argument should still be rejected because it contradicts the rule of lenity. The rule of lenity is a well-established canon of statutory construction requiring that, if a criminal statute can reasonably be interpreted in different ways, courts must adopt the interpretation most favorable to the accused.