Charles "Charlie" Bethel
Non-Partisan | Georgia
Candidate Profile
Leans Originalist
BIOGRAPHY
Name
Charles "Charlie" Bethel
Party
Non-Partisan
Election Year
2026
Election
Republican Primary, Judicial General and Senate District 7 Specials
Race
Justice of the Supreme Court, Bethel
Incumbent
Yes
Links
EDUCATION
Candidate did not provide
WORK & MILITARY
Candidate did not provide
AFFILIATIONS
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
Candidate did not provide
SCORECARDS
CONSERVATIVE ORGANIZATIONS
LIBERAL ORGANIZATIONS
ENDORSEMENTS
CONSERVATIVE (1)
Frontline Policy Action
SELECTED CONTRIBUTIONS
CONSERVATIVE
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (40)
Larry Walker III (2020)
Ben Watson (2018)
Blake Tillery (2018)
Brandon Beach (2018)
Bruce Thompson (2018)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (25)
Lindsey Tippins (2026)
Bill Cowsert (2020)
Bill Heath (2020)
Brian Strickland (2020)
Bruce Thompson (2020)
LIBERAL
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (1)
Veronica Brinson (2020)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (5)
Barnes Law Group (2020)
Michael "Doc" Rhett (2020)
Robert Trammell (2020)
Stacey Godfrey Evans (2020)
Veronica Brinson (2020)
OTHER INFORMATION
Ammons v. State (2021). Authored. The Court partly agreed and partly disagreed with the lower court. It said that a person cannot be forced to take a breath or field sobriety test because doing so is considered giving evidence against themselves under the Georgia Constitution. However, refusing a blood test is allowed to be used in court and does not violate the Constitution. The court overruled an older case, Keenan, which had allowed using refusal evidence for breath tests.
Marquez v. Aguirre (2025). The majority denied review of the case, leaving the court of appeals’ decision in place. This allowed the biological father’s legitimation petition to continue under the “best interests of the child” standard without ending the legal father’s parental rights first. Justice Bethel agreed with the denial. He said the lower court’s approach was consistent with precedent and workable, but emphasized that Georgia law is unclear on whether legitimation actions automatically require ending the legal father’s rights or just challenge the presumption of legitimacy. He emphasized that these questions are for the legislature to clarify, not the courts.
King v. King (2023). Justice Bethel agreed with the Court’s decision. The Court said that if someone is in a confidential relationship and also has a fiduciary duty, breaking that duty by hiding important information can lead to a tort claim for breach of fiduciary duty under Georgia law. The case arose after the Eleventh Circuit Court certified three questions about whether a fiduciary must disclose information, especially when there’s no written agreement with a minor beneficiary. The Court answered the first question, but didn’t answer the other two questions finding they depended on specific facts and could be handled under existing Georgia law.
Maynard et al. v. Snapchat Inc. (2022). Justice Bethel disagreed with the majority, which held that Snapchat could owe a duty to design a reasonably safe product even when a third party intentionally misuses it, as long as the risk was reasonably foreseeable. The case involved a driver who was using Snapchat’s “Speed Filter” while driving over 100 mph and caused a serious crash. Bethel said Snapchat should not be responsible because the driver’s reckless and illegal actions—not the app—caused the accident. He explained that the driver’s speeding was an independent, intentional act, not a normal risk the app could foresee. Bethel argued the majority went too far by making manufacturers responsible for how people misuse their products, and he believed the connection between the app and the accident was too indirect to allow the lawsuit to continue.
Schmitz v. Barron et al. (2021). Bethel authored the opinion. The court said it was okay to dismiss Schmitz’s challenge to the November 3, 2020 election for House District 52. Schmitz had tried to contest the results, but he did not make sure the winner, Shea Roberts, was properly given notice of the contest as required by law (OCGA § 21-2-524(f)). The lower court dismissed the case because Schmitz didn’t show that he had worked hard enough to fix the notice problem. On appeal, Schmitz argued the court couldn’t dismiss it for that reason, but the Supreme Court agreed with the lower court. The Court said it's petitioner’s job to make ensure all candidates are served properly. Because Schmitz didn’t prove he tried hard enough to serve Roberts, dismissal was correct.
QUESTIONNAIRE
RIGHT TO LIFE
Was Dobbs v. Jackson rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: In Dobbs, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the federal constitution does not confer a right to abortion.)
Did not answer
Does the federal Constitution support the right to physician assisted suicide? Please explain in light of Washington v. Glucksberg (1997).
Did not answer
Human life deserves legal protection from conception until natural death.
Did not answer
How do you view the judiciary’s role in matters of abortion regulation following Dobbs?
Did not answer
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
Do you believe religious liberty is at risk in the United States. If so, what is the judiciary's proper role in addressing this issue?
Did not answer
Does the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment require government to be strictly secular or does it allow for the nation's religious heritage?
Did not answer
Was Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: The U.S. Supreme Court held tha the state may not show religious hostility when enforcing anti-discrimination laws against a business owner.)
Did not answer
CRIMINAL JUSTICE & PUBLIC SAFETY
The burden of proof in a criminal case is generally that the state must provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Some say the reason the burden of proof is so high is because we greatly value ensuring that the innocent are not unjustly imprisoned. Please comment on this topic.
Did not answer
When reviewing wrongful conviction claims, what role, if any, should judges play in determining remedies?
Did not answer
2ND AMENDMENT
What is your understanding of the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms?
Did not answer
OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES
Which branch of government do you believe was intended to wield the most authority?
Did not answer
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Describe your judicial philosophy.
Did not answer
Do you believe judges should primarily apply the law according to its original public meaning, or do you believe the law evolves over time to reflect contemporary values?
Did not answer
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Did not answer
Was Obergefell v. Hodges rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: The U.S. Supreme Court held Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses create a right for same-sex couples to marry.)
Did not answer
A. How should a judge approach a case where the constitutional or statutory text is clear on its face? B. Conversely, how should a judge proceed when the text is ambiguous or silent on a disputed issue?
Did not answer
What is your view of judicial restraint versus judicial activism? How do you define each?
Did not answer
What is the proper role of a judge?
Did not answer
When applying or interpreting the text of a statute or constitutional provision, is it ever proper for a judge to consider present day public opinion or consequences?
Did not answer
If precedent departs from the Constitution’s text or original meaning, should a judge follow it or correct the error? Please explain.
Did not answer
ABOUT YOU
Have you ever been convicted of a felony? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
Have you ever been penalized for sexual misconduct in either civil or criminal court? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
Did not answer
VALUES
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
Did not answer
What is your understanding of parental rights under the Constitution regarding the upbringing of children, particularly regarding choices about education and sexual identity?
Did not answer
Is gender identity a protected class under the Constitution? Please explain the constitutional basis for your view.
Did not answer
