HB 960: Gwinnett Judicial Circuit; superior courts; provide twelfth judge

In plain language

What the bill does

Who it affects

Why it matters

Key provisions

From the bill

Discussed in meetings (12)

The House and Senate meetings that took this bill up, from their machine transcripts. Each account was written by Georgia Commons with AI and is not part of the record; the video is what was said.

1. House Judiciary Committee, January 27, 2026

   From 0:44:20 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said the bill would add a twelfth superior court judge to the Gwinnett Judicial Circuit. According to the sponsor, the circuit had a demonstrated need for 14.6 judges and a workload value of 1.32, ranking third behind the Northeastern and Middle circuits. The sponsor said the Judicial Council recognized the need, the circuit’s chief superior court judge supplied a supporting letter, and an overwhelming bipartisan majority of the county’s legislative delegation supported the bill. The chair supported the request, citing busy court operations and years of requests from Gwinnett judges. Members asked no substantive questions. The committee approved the bill by voice vote, with no opposition heard.

2. House Rules Committee, February 2, 2026

   From 0:52:50 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said HB 960 would add a 12th Superior Court judge to the Gwinnett Judicial Circuit. The sponsor said the circuit had 11 judges and an assessed need for 14.2. No questions followed. The committee later placed the bill on Monday’s floor calendar without objection.

3. House floor session, February 2, 2026 (legislative day 10)

   From 1:23:35 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel · Confirmed by the 2026 House Journal, p. 186

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said HB 960 would add a 12th superior court judge to the Gwinnett Judicial Circuit to address heavy workloads. The sponsor said the circuit had nearly 100,000 residents and just under 1,900 cases per judge, compared with state averages of 50,000 residents and just under 1,500 cases. The sponsor said the Judicial Council identified a need for 14.6 judges and ranked this judgeship third on its workload list. The sponsor also cited bipartisan delegation support and support from the county commission chair. Asked whether the need reflected crime, the sponsor explained that superior courts handle many types of cases, not just criminal matters. Another member cited Judicial Council statistics and about 500 residents reporting for jury duty when the bill went through committee. Asked about funeral services, the sponsor agreed that the additional judge could help with timely death-certificate approvals. Members also congratulated the sponsor on a first bill. The House passed the bill 169 to 1.

4. Senate floor session, March 19, 2026 (legislative day 34)

   From 2:01:20 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel · Confirmed by the bill's status history (Senate Withdrawn & Recommitted)

   Summary by Georgia Commons: A senator requested moving the bill from Judiciary to Ethics. The clerk described it as providing a twelfth superior court judge for the Gwinnett Judicial Circuit, initially appointed by the governor, with successors elected. An objection prompted a vote, but no reasons for or against the transfer were stated. The Senate approved the transfer 30-20.

5. Senate Ethics Committee, March 24, 2026

   From 0:17:08 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The original sponsor said HB 960 would add a twelfth Gwinnett judge, citing a Judicial Council estimate that the county needed 14.2. The sponsor objected to receiving no advance notice of the replacement. The chair said the judgeship language had advanced in another bill. The substitute’s sponsor proposed hand-marked, machine-counted ballots for November, additional recount requirements and online election data. The sponsor cited federal findings of voting-software vulnerabilities as a reason to act. Changes removed assigned early-voting sites, reduced proposed voter-challenge compliance fines from $10,000 to $1,000 and relocated recount language. One member questioned county costs, ballot supplies and the implementation deadline. The sponsor said additional scanners might be needed, cited $15 million already appropriated and acknowledged that payment for paper remained unresolved. Another member questioned hand-count accuracy; the sponsor supported checking counts against ballot totals. Members raised concerns about exposing protected voters through online records. The sponsor promised further review and said batch identifiers would help secure ballots. The committee unanimously amended the substitute to require recounts to begin, rather than finish, within two business days and reduced fines to $100. Restoring the judgeship proposal failed 4-8. An amendment preserving the secretary of state’s oversight also failed after members questioned the State Election Board’s capacity and the change’s constitutionality. The amended substitute passed 8-4.

6. Senate Rules Committee, March 25, 2026

   From 0:45:24 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The chair selected HB 960 from an absent member’s requests. No provisions were discussed. The committee unanimously approved the calendar package containing the bill.

7. Senate floor session, March 27, 2026 (legislative day 38)

   From 1:34:35 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel · Confirmed by the bill's status history (Senate Engrossed)

   Summary by Georgia Commons: The Senate voted 31-18 to protect HB 960 and three other bills from floor amendments. The sponsor explained that a substitute completely replaced the proposed Gwinnett judgeship with election changes, including hand-marked paper ballots for November. The sponsor said revisions reduced fines for failing to remove successfully challenged registrations to $100, preserved voters' choice of early voting locations and placed manual recount requirements for elections within 1% in the proper legal section. The sponsor cited nine federally identified voting-system vulnerabilities and said 67% of Americans use hand-marked ballots. One opponent supported paper ballots but opposed an unfunded, rushed transition. A second questioned manual-count accuracy, registrar penalties and transferring oversight from the elected secretary of state to the State Election Board. Other opponents warned about costs, privacy, worker training and voter confidence. Another member said DeKalb would need all 432 ballot styles at every early voting site, increasing storage, security and error risks, and suggested waiting to obtain on-demand printers. The Senate adopted the substitute and passed the bill 32-21. A motion to reconsider failed 21-31.

• Read aloud: House floor session, January 15, 2026 (legislative day 4), 0:40:29
• Read aloud: House floor session, January 16, 2026 (legislative day 5), 0:56:54
• Read aloud: House floor session, January 28, 2026 (legislative day 8), 0:48:56
• Read aloud: Senate floor session, February 3, 2026 (legislative day 11), 0:29:30
• Read aloud: Senate floor session, March 25, 2026 (legislative day 37), 0:32:59

Status timeline

Sponsors

Votes

Topics