Did gerogia in 2020 elections change laws ?

1. What changed — a short inventory of major reforms

The omnibus SB 202 codified numerous concrete changes: it limited absentee/drop boxes to one per 100,000 registered voters or to the number of advance voting locations in a county (reducing the many outdoor, 24/7 boxes used in 2020) and required boxes be colocated at election offices or inside advance voting sites ^{[7] [8] [2]}. The law imposed a new photo-ID requirement for absentee voting and cut the absentee request deadline roughly in half compared with 2020 procedures, while allowing election workers to begin processing absentee ballots earlier to avoid reporting delays ^{[9] [10] [2]}. SB 202 also tightened rules around mobile voting units, gave the State Election Board power to replace county election boards with state-appointed administrators in some circumstances, and changed poll-worker residency rules to allow cross-county service ^{[3] [1] [7]}.

2. Procedural shifts that matter in practice

Beyond headline items, the law rewired administrative and procedural levers that affect how votes are handled: runoff windows were shortened, scanned ballot images were exposed to public-records rules, and provisions created broader latitude for unlimited challenges to voter eligibility — mechanisms critics warn invite mass challenges and administrative burden ^{[6] [3] [5]}. The bill also criminalized certain activities around voting lines—such as distributing food or water near voters—which backers say prevents coercion and opponents say penalizes community support for long waits ^{[6] [10]}.

3. Why lawmakers said they acted — and what opponents say

Republican lawmakers and some policy groups argued SB 202 was a mainstream reform intended to “make it easy to vote but hard to cheat,” citing perceived loss of confidence after 2020 despite no evidence of systemic fraud ^{[8] [4]}. Civil-rights organizations, voting-rights lawyers and many Democrats countered that the law disproportionately burdens voters of color and codifies tools for partisan oversight of local election administration; those groups filed lawsuits contesting the statute’s effects and the timing of its enactment ^{[5] [6]}.

4. Litigation and subsequent legislative tweaks

Multiple legal challenges followed the law’s passage, and at least one federal judge declined to enjoin certain criminal provisions while litigation continued; courts have been a key arena for disputes over whether provisions are unlawful or merely speculative in harm ^[6]. Meanwhile, Georgia’s legislature did not stop with 2021: Republican lawmakers continued refining election rules ahead of 2024, passing measures proponents say reinforce earlier reforms and critics say further entrench partisan controls and expand grounds for voter challenges ^[11].

5. Note on potential confusion: the country of Georgia in 2020

If the question instead refers to the independent country of Georgia (in Eurasia), that country amended its constitution and election code in mid‑2020 to change its electoral system and increase proportional representation for parliamentary elections — a distinct legal change unrelated to U.S. state law developments ^[12].

Conclusion

In short: yes—the U.S. state of Georgia changed its election laws after the contested 2020 cycle, enacting SB 202 in 2021 and following with additional rule changes later; the reforms altered ballot access, administration, oversight and enforcement mechanisms and have been the subject of sharp partisan debate and ongoing litigation ^{[2] [1] [6] [11]}.