Democrats are hoping to unseat a pair of Georgia Supreme Court justices this month, in what would be the first time in more than 100 years that a sitting state justice has lost election — but according to Bolts Magazine, a ruling from the court itself created a massive flaw in the system that potentially lets the justices cancel their own election after losing, and one of them is not responding to questions about whether they will take advantage of it."Two liberal lawyers, former Democratic state Senator Jen Jordan and personal injury attorney Miracle Rankin, are seeking to oust Justices Sarah Warren and Charlie Bethel, respectively, and all but Warren agreed to interviews with Bolts," said the report. "The elections are officially nonpartisan, but the challengers are running with Democratic Party backing, while Governor Brian Kemp and other Republicans have rallied around the incumbents."According to the report, the issue stems "from Justice Keith Blackwell’s announcement in February of [2020] that he would resign in November, just weeks before his term was due to end. Blackwell had been due to face two challengers in May, but when he announced his plans to step down in the future, five months after voters were set to weigh in, state officials said the election should be postponed until 2022. Blackwell’s opponents sued to keep the election on the ballot, but the state’s high court sided against them in a 6-2 ruling, with Warren in the majority. (Bethel recused himself from this case)."The dissenting justices warned that this logic would allow judges to resign after losing an election, letting the governor appoint their replacement and effectively nullifying the election altogether — a state of affairs Bolts editor Daniel Nichanian described as a "staggering loophole."Bethel pledged to serve out his full term even if he loses. However, "Warren, in addition to declining an interview request, also declined to respond to written questions" — leaving it an open possibility she could exploit the loophole to block Jordan from being seated if she wins.The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Louisiana vs. Callais, which severely limited the use of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to require a representative number of majority-Black legislative districts, looms over the judicial election, with Jordan and Rankin pushing the issue hard.By contrast, the current court, eight of whose nine members were originally appointed by Republican governors, has a mixed record on voting rights. They did shut down a plot by MAGA election board officials to rewrite state voting procedures, but also "played an instrumental role in shielding Donald Trump from criminal punishment for his efforts to overturn his election defeat in Georgia in 2020," Bolts noted.