Election recounts by hand ruled "Unconstitutional?"

[Maxmars]

I recently read this from FoxNews: 'Illegal, unconstitutional and void': Georgia judge strikes down new election rules after legal fights

Of course, I was intrigued... how could simply recounting ballots by hand ever be "unconstitutional?"

Of course, the wrinkle was prebaked into the articulation of the state law... apparently crafted by those who use the law for politics.

One of the measures, a requirement for all ballots to be hand counted by three county election officials after they had been machine tabulated to ensure the totals match, has become a political lightening rod in recent weeks.

This measure, would seem very sober and sane... if it weren't connected directly to "certification." 
Certification is part of the electoral process... a nearly sanctified and codified affair... any proposed changes to it demands constitutional review.

Had they simply imposed the requirement regardless and separate from "election reporting," it would have been safe from this partisan gaming of the system.

It's a shame really... a fairly good idea, but it was almost 'designed' to fail legal scrutiny given the political warfare that the duopoly continually evokes.

[xuenchen]

The obvious problem is corruption might be discovered if a basic total is tabbed before the ballot "transportation" !!

What could they possibly be scared of?

 

[quintessentone]

The obvious problem is corruption might be discovered if a basic total is tabbed before the ballot "transportation" !!

What could they possibly be scared of?

 

Source? Or is that your special kind of math and art piece?

[Maxmars]

I think this problem 'transcends' political partisanship.

The idea, in the 21s century, that became clear was the excuse that "we can't count"... to deny reality and embrace ignorance as a form of "political-think."

Which suggests to me a more realistic (less hyperbolic) hypothesis... political "parties" should not have ANY influence in vote tabulation... ever.
Any partisanship seems to skew the system. 
And the 'fuzzy" nature of party-control defeats the impeachability of a flat count.  (Few say they lost an election, many say they got "robbed.")

But with parties effectively "owning" the government... they codify their 'control.' 
(Just how is it that all voting machines are some company's "private property?")

And it is now not just codified... but 'sanctified' (in a secular sense) and any challenge is immediately rebuked - by them and their spokespersons - as strictly "un-American."

It's a "continuity of governance" thing... because they already know that "people" shouldn't be allowed to inquire or verify without party oversight and approval.