ATLANTA — Amid designation of members to the newly created and Republican-backed Georgia Prosecuting Attorneys Qualifications Commission, four district attorneys are suing the state to invalidate the new board.

The lawsuit, filed Aug. 2 in Fulton County Superior Court, argues that the law creating the Commission, SB 92, overrides the will of voters, threatens prosecutorial independence, and violates federal and state constitutions.

SB 92 gives the Commission the authority to investigate and remove local prosecutors, and is appointed by the governor, lieutenant governor, speaker of the House, and the Senate Committee on Assignments — all positions held or dominated by Republicans.

“This law is a direct threat to every Georgian who exercises their right to vote – their right to choose the person who they think best represents their values in the courtroom,” said Stone Mountain (DeKalb County) District Attorney Sherry Boston in her announcement of the lawsuit, which she is leading. “SB 92 says to voters, if the state doesn’t like your choice, the state will choose for you.”

Boston, a Democrat, is joined on the lawsuit by Augusta District Attorney Jared Williams and Cobb District Attorney Flynn Broady — both Democrat— and Republican Towaliga District Attorney Jonathan Adams.

The prosecutors in the Boston v. State of Georgia lawsuit are represented by Public Rights Project — a national nonprofit that works with local governments to protect civil rights — along with Atlanta-based Washington, Dreyer, and Associates, and Bruce P. Brown Law.

“Prosecutors around the country are under attack for trying to represent the will of voters and implement reforms that make our criminal justice system more fair. Georgia is ground zero in that fight,” said Josh Rosenthal, legal director of Public Rights Project. “SB 92 is an anti-democratic and unconstitutional intrusion into core powers of local prosecutors and must be halted.”

SB 92 states that prosecutors are required to “review every individual case for which probable cause for prosecution exists, and make a prosecutorial decision under the law based on the facts and circumstances of each individual case…”

Prosecutors in the lawsuit argue that SB 92 threatens the ability of local prosecutors to handle their dockets efficiently and to focus on serious crimes most affecting public safety.

In addition, the prosecutors say that the lack of resources and case backlogs have demanded that prosecutors find ways to focus on the most serious of crimes and use tools like pretrial diversion to resolve cases more efficiently.

However, supporters of SB 92 have indicated that the bill is necessary to target “soft on crime” prosecutors who are lenient on certain crimes and don’t maximize penalties.

“All Georgians deserve to be safe, and all crime victims deserve justice,” Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr posted on Twitter Aug. 2. “Like everyone else, DAs who choose to violate their oaths of office are not immune from accountability, and we will vigorously defend this law in court.”

In response to a news media post on Twitter announcing the lawsuit, Carr stated: “Unfortunately, some DAs have embraced the progressive movement across the nation of refusing to enforce the law. That is a dereliction of duty, and as a result, Georgia’s communities suffer.”

Opponents of SB 92 have criticized the new law calling it a mechanism to target Democrat prosecutors and an unnecessary mechanism to oust local prosecutors.

“Not only is SB 92 unconstitutional, this new Commission is also unnecessary and wasteful,” said DA Boston, “Georgia already provides other ways to address misconduct by prosecutors–including Bar discipline, impeachment, and ultimately, the ballot box.”

According to SB 92 members were to be appointed by July 1, 2023 and establish regulations by Oct. 1. All appointments to the Commission, however, have not yet been made.

Prosecutors in the lawsuit are asking the court to invalidate SB 92 or at minimum, halt the PAQC from handling any complaints or disciplining any local prosecutors.