Did you know that Truthout is a nonprofit and independently funded by readers like you? If you value what we do, please support our work with a donation.
The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), who was seeking an injunction blocking him from having to appear before a grand jury to give testimony regarding an election interference inquiry in the state of Georgia.
Graham had previously lost an appeal from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals after a district judge ruled that he had to appear before the grand jury to give testimony regarding his conversations with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) relating to the state’s 2020 presidential election outcome. Graham had allegedly asked Raffensperger to disqualify all mail-in ballots from counties with high rates of signature discrepancies, even if it meant ballots with no issues — the vast majority of those sent in — would be tossed aside and uncounted.
Had Raffensberger complied with Graham’s request, it would have excluded thousands of legitimate votes from the state’s total. Because most mail-in ballots that year came from supporters of now-President Joe Biden, this would have illegitimately skewed the election results in favor of Donald Trump.
A temporary injunction on the appeals court ruling for Graham to appear before the grand jury was issued by Justice Clarence Thomas late last month, as he is responsible for overseeing the 11th Circuit Court. But on Tuesday, the Supreme Court issued an order stating that it would not grant the request to hear Graham’s appeal.
The latest order means that Graham must appear before the grand jury to answer questions from Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis regarding his conversations with Raffensperger — and possibly questions about strategizing with Trump and his campaign team to overturn the election result in the state.
Graham may still refuse to answer questions by citing his Fifth Amendment right to avoid incriminating himself.
It’s likely that Graham committed a crime in seeking to have mail-in ballots improperly discarded, as it is illegal in the state of Georgia to try to coerce an election official to engage in election fraud.
The High Court did write in its order on Tuesday that Graham does not have to answer any questions regarding his official business as a U.S. senator, however. It’s possible that Graham will claim in future appeals after meeting with the grand jury that he was acting within his senatorial duties when trying to coerce Raffensperger to discount thousands of votes.
Graham emphasized that portion of the order in a statement issued by his office.
“The Senator’s legal team intends to engage with the District Attorney’s office on next steps to ensure respect for this constitutional immunity,” the senator said in the statement.
A terrifying moment. We appeal for your support.
In the last weeks, we have witnessed an authoritarian assault on communities in Minnesota and across the nation.
The need for truthful, grassroots reporting is urgent at this cataclysmic historical moment. Yet, Trump-aligned billionaires and other allies have taken over many legacy media outlets — the culmination of a decades-long campaign to place control of the narrative into the hands of the political right.
We refuse to let Trump’s blatant propaganda machine go unchecked. Untethered to corporate ownership or advertisers, Truthout remains fearless in our reporting and our determination to use journalism as a tool for justice.
But we need your help just to fund our basic expenses. Over 80 percent of Truthout’s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors.
Truthout has launched a fundraiser to add 379 new monthly donors in the next 6 days. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger one-time gift, Truthout only works with your support.