NC Supreme Court Election 2024 Vote Exclusion Impact 65k Ballots Legal Challenge

North Carolina Election Dispute: 65k Votes Challenged

By Darius Spearman (africanelements)

Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.

The already tight race for a North Carolina Supreme Court seat just got a lot more complicated. A state appeals court decision has thrown the results into question, potentially invalidating tens of thousands of votes. This ruling puts Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin back in contention after trailing Democrat Allison Riggs. More significantly, it raises serious concerns about voter rights, particularly for communities often targeted by stricter voting rules.

When election margins are razor-thin, every vote counts, but now thousands of legally cast ballots hang in the balance. This situation highlights the ongoing battles over who gets to vote and how easy it is to do so. Moreover, it underscores how legal challenges can impact election outcomes long after Election Day.

NC Appeals Court Ruling Rocks Tight Race

A three-judge panel of the North Carolina Court of Appeals recently sided with Republican Jefferson Griffin in the closely watched state Supreme Court race (Axios Raleigh). The decision, split 2-1 along party lines, ordered state election officials to re-examine over 60,000 ballots (Courthouse News Service). This ruling came after Griffin challenged the validity of these votes following two recounts that left him trailing Democrat Allison Riggs by just 734 votes (Axios Raleigh).

The court’s order requires the voters whose ballots are flagged to prove their eligibility within a tight 15-day window. Failure to provide sufficient proof means their votes could be thrown out. Subsequently, the appeals court has mandated a recalculation of the vote totals based on which ballots remain valid (Carolina Journal). This sudden requirement places a significant burden on voters, potentially disenfranchising thousands who followed the rules in place at the time they voted.

Voter Eligibility NC Supreme Court Scrutiny

Jefferson Griffin’s legal challenge specifically targeted three groups of voters whose eligibility verification methods he questioned (Courthouse News Service). The largest group includes voters who registered without having a driver’s license or Social Security number that matched the state’s database records. Importantly, these individuals still provided identification when they cast their ballots at the polling place, following existing procedures.

The second group consists of military and overseas voters who did not submit identification along with their absentee ballots. Current rules often have different requirements for these citizens serving abroad. The third, and smallest, group involves overseas voters who registered to vote but reportedly never resided within the United States (Courthouse News Service). Critically, challenging these specific groups raises red flags, as requirements around documentation and database matching can disproportionately affect marginalized communities, including Black voters who may face more hurdles obtaining specific forms of ID or navigating bureaucratic systems.

Judges Divided on North Carolina Election Dispute

The appeals court ruling revealed a sharp disagreement among the judges, reflecting broader political divides over election integrity versus voter access. The two Republican judges in the majority, John Tyson and Jefferson Griffin (the candidate’s father, who recused himself from the case but whose colleagues heard it), emphasized the constitutional right to an accurate vote count (Axios Raleigh). Their perspective suggests that ensuring only eligible votes are counted outweighs potential burdens on voters.

Conversely, Democratic Judge Carolyn Hampson offered a strong dissent. She described Griffin’s challenge as speculative, pointing out the lack of concrete evidence that any of the disputed votes were actually cast by ineligible individuals (Axios Raleigh). Furthermore, Judge Hampson warned that the majority’s decision could lead to the mass disenfranchisement of lawful voters who simply navigated the existing system (WCNC). This concern resonates deeply within the Black community, which has historically fought against measures that erect barriers to voting.

Riggs vs Griffin: The Path Forward

In response to the appeals court setback, Democrat Allison Riggs has firmly stated her intention to appeal the decision to the North Carolina Supreme Court (WCNC). She argues vehemently that the ruling jeopardizes the votes of approximately 65,000 lawful North Carolina voters who followed existing procedures. Her campaign frames this as a fight to protect legitimate votes from being discarded based on technical challenges raised after the fact.

An interesting wrinkle in the upcoming appeal is Riggs’ own position. Since she currently holds a seat on the very Supreme Court that will hear the appeal, there’s a strong possibility she will need to recuse herself from deliberations to avoid a conflict of interest (WCNC). Regardless, the state’s highest court will now be tasked with weighing the appeals court’s reasoning against Riggs’ arguments, making a final decision that could determine the election’s winner and set precedents for future vote challenges. Ultimately, this legal battle puts the fundamental right to vote under a microscope, particularly concerning how procedural challenges can impact election integrity and voter confidence.

Jefferson Griffin Vote Recount Leads to Challenge

The entire controversy stems from the extremely close nature of the election results after the initial count and subsequent recounts. Republican Jefferson Griffin found himself trailing Democrat Allison Riggs by a mere 734 votes (Axios Raleigh). Such a narrow margin naturally invites intense scrutiny and provides fertile ground for legal challenges, as candidates look for any potential path to victory.

Instead of seeking yet another recount, Griffin’s campaign shifted strategy, focusing on questioning the validity of specific sets of ballots based on verification procedures (Courthouse News Service). This approach moves the battle from simple counting to complex legal arguments about voter eligibility and administrative processes. Consequently, this case serves as a stark reminder that close elections can trigger challenges that delve deep into the mechanics of voting, potentially altering outcomes and raising fundamental questions about whose vote truly counts, a question that historically carries extra weight for Black voters.

The North Carolina Supreme Court race is far from over. With tens of thousands of votes under review and a pending appeal to the state’s highest court, the final outcome remains uncertain. This situation underscores the fragility of voting rights and the ways election laws and legal interpretations can significantly impact results. For the Black community and other groups who have faced historical disenfranchisement, this case is a critical watch, as it touches upon issues of access, verification, and the fundamental right to have one’s vote counted.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Darius Spearman is a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College, where he has been teaching since 2007. He is the author of several books, including Between The Color Lines: A History of African Americans on the California Frontier Through 1890. You can visit Darius online at africanelements.org.