Kemp v. Gonzalez

When the district attorney for the Western Judicial Circuit resigned early in 2020, Deborah Gonzalez tried to run for the seat in that November's election. The Secretary of State blocked her, citing a Georgia law that let a governor's appointee serve until 2022 instead, skipping the 2020 election. Gonzalez and other voters sued in federal court, arguing the law violated the Georgia Constitution's requirement that district attorneys be elected for fixed four-year terms. The federal Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals asked the Supreme Court of Georgia to decide whether the Georgia law conflicts with the state constitution. The Supreme Court of Georgia examined the constitutional text and older cases about judges and prosecutors, concluding that the Constitution locks in a four-year term for the office itself, not the person filling it. An appointee only fills out the rest of that term, so the law allowing appointees to serve longer than the term they inherited is unconstitutional.

The Georgia Constitution fixes a four-year term for each district attorney's office, and an appointee filling a vacancy only serves out the remainder of that term until a successor is elected at the general election preceding its expiration; the statute conflicts with this by letting appointees serve beyond that unexpired term, so it is unconstitutional to that extent.

The ruling affects how vacancies in Georgia district attorney offices are filled statewide, requiring elections to happen on schedule even when a governor appoints a replacement. Voters, candidates, and county election officials now know appointed prosecutors cannot bypass a scheduled election to extend their time in office.

Certified question answered

1. The court began from the presumption that laws passed by the legislature are constitutional unless the conflict with the state constitution is clear and palpable, placing the burden on the challenger to show unconstitutionality.
2. Looking at the constitutional text governing district attorneys, the court found it fixes a four-year term for the office and requires that a successor be elected at the general election immediately before that term ends, with the officeholder serving only until that successor is duly elected.
3. Relying on older cases interpreting nearly identical constitutional language for judges and solicitors-general (predecessors to district attorneys), the court held that this election timing is tied to the office's fixed term, not to when a vacancy happens to occur.
4. Applying this to the challenged statute, the court found it lets a governor's appointee serve past the end of the predecessor's four-year term without an election, which directly conflicts with the constitutional requirement that a successor be elected before that term expires.
5. The court distinguished a prior decision about appointed judges, explaining that the constitutional provision for judges specifically creates a new shortened term for appointees, while the district attorney provision contains no similar language allowing a term extension.
6. Because the legislature cannot expand a constitutionally created and limited office by ordinary statute, the court concluded the law is unconstitutional to the extent it lets appointed district attorneys serve beyond the remainder of the term they inherited.

• district attorney vacancy
• gubernatorial appointments
• Georgia Constitution
• election timing
• certified question