Pam Bondi Drops Election Law Challenge Amid Controversy
Attorney General Pam Bondi ordered the Justice Department on Monday to dismiss a lawsuit challenging Georgia’s controversial election reform law, rejecting claims that the legislation suppressed Black voter turnout. The decision ends a legal battle initiated by the Biden administration in June 2021.
Bondi characterized the original lawsuit as promoting “false claims of suppression” during a press conference at the Justice Department. “Georgians deserve secure elections, not fabricated claims of false voter suppression meant to divide us,” she stated, according to Newsweek.
The contested legislation, Senate Bill 202, was enacted by Georgia’s Republican lawmakers following President Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in the state. The Biden administration had characterized the law as “Jim Crow in the 21st century,” a characterization Bondi firmly rejected.
Controversial Voting Changes
SB 202 implemented several significant changes to Georgia’s voting procedures. These included a new photo ID requirement for mail-in ballots, shortened timelines for requesting absentee ballots, reduced ballot drop boxes in metro Atlanta, and a prohibition on distributing food and water to voters waiting in line.
According to First Coast News, Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed the bill into law on March 25, 2021, despite intense criticism from voting rights advocates who dubbed it “Jim Crow 2.0.”
The Justice Department under Biden had alleged these measures were specifically designed to suppress Black voter participation. In dismissing the lawsuit, Bondi claimed that Black voter turnout in Georgia “actually increased” after the law took effect.
U.S. AG Bondi Dismisses Biden Admin Lawsuit Challenging Georgia Republican Supported Election Lawhttps://t.co/PZMzQocBv4 pic.twitter.com/v40933GdOS
— Tony Seruga (@TonySeruga) March 31, 2025
Economic Impact and Backlash
The law sparked significant backlash when passed in 2021. Major League Baseball relocated its All-Star Game from Atlanta, and companies including Delta Air Lines and Coca-Cola issued statements criticizing the measure.
In Monday’s announcement, the Department of Justice noted that the boycotts triggered by opposition to the legislation resulted in estimated economic losses of $100 million for Georgia, particularly from the MLB’s decision to move the All-Star Game.
Acting Associate Attorney General Chad Mizelle was blunt in the DOJ’s press release: “There is nothing racist about protecting elections — baseless claims of Jim Crow-style discrimination are the real insult,” adding that the department is “done with this disgrace.”
Disputed Claims on Voter Turnout
While Bondi emphasized that voter participation increased under SB 202, civil rights organizations contest this interpretation. A December report by the Brennan Center for Justice found that although the absolute number of ballots cast by Black voters rose between 2020 and 2024, turnout among Black voters actually declined by 0.6 percent due to population growth outpacing voter participation.
“Understanding whether, or to what extent, these declines are due to restrictive voting policies such as Georgia’s S.B. 202…will be of signal importance,” the report noted, as cited by Newsweek.
Reactions from Both Sides
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, celebrated the decision as “a significant win for Georgia voters” despite the economic consequences of “losing an All-Star game and the left’s boycott of Georgia as a result of commonsense election law.”
In contrast, Judith Browne Dianis, executive director of the Advancement Project, had previously characterized laws like SB 202 as “part of a coordinated effort to reduce access to the ballot for voters of color and low-income communities.”
While the Justice Department has now withdrawn its case, other legal challenges to Georgia’s election law remain active. Several civil rights and election integrity groups continue to pursue separate lawsuits invoking the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act.
The DOJ’s decision represents a significant shift in federal policy toward state election laws under the current administration, potentially influencing similar legislation in other states ahead of future elections.
