The North Carolina Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected an appeals court judge’s legal bid to overturn his election defeat, allowing the election protests to proceed in a trial court.
Republican Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin, the court said, was improperly ignored. State law Challenges to election results must be held in Wake County Superior Court. However, the state Supreme Court allowed the temporary stay on election certification to stand.
The court’s five Republicans concurred in full, while the bench’s lone Democrat dissented in part. The three GOP judges also indicated they would accept Griffin’s contention that the North Carolina Board of Elections improperly and illegally counted tens of thousands of invalid votes.
Griffin beat incumbent Justice Allison Riggs, a Democrat, by just 734 votes in the state Supreme Court race. In his election petition, he asked the North Carolina Supreme Court to force the state Board of Elections to throw out more than 60,000 ballots cast by voters who he said were ineligible because they either failed to register their voter registration. Did not provide driver’s license or social security numbers on applications. , failed to include a photo ID with their absentee ballot or never physically resided in North Carolina. Throwing away these votes will give him victory.
The North Carolina Board of Elections denied Griffin’s election protests on the same grounds in mid-December, prompting his lawsuit. Riggs, who has removed himself from the case and intervened as a defendant, argues that Griffin’s request threatens to disenfranchise thousands of eligible North Carolina voters after the election.
Riggs said in a statement Thursday that, while he agreed with the court’s decision, he was “disappointed” that it opened the door to prolonging the case.
“Voters elected me 79 days ago to continue serving on the North Carolina Supreme Court, and my election is the last unconfirmed race in the country,” he said. “I will continue to make sure that the more than 65,000 voters who want Griffin disenfranchised are heard. No matter how long it takes, I will not stop doing the right thing.”
In its Wednesday ruling, the court suggested it broadly agreed with Griffin’s arguments, citing previous legal precedent that allowed illegal votes to be counted alongside legal ballots. giving “effectively ‘disenfranchised'” voters who cast legal votes.
Chief Justice Paul Newby, a Republican, defended Griffin’s election protests in a concurring opinion. He rejected claims by critics that the appeal judge’s request was anti-democratic.
“It is understandable that the petitioner and many North Carolina voters are questioning how this could happen,” Newby wrote, calling it “highly unusual” that Griffin’s 10,000 votes on election night would be the same. The lead turned into a deficit of 734 votes by the end of the week. . “The petitioner has the right to question this result through the legal procedures available to him at law.”
Winning an election by such a narrow margin is not unprecedented in North Carolina, even in a state Supreme Court race. Newby himself was declared the winner of North Carolina’s 2020 Supreme Court race by just 401. About 5.4 million votes were cast, after two recounts – one by machine and one by hand. State Board of Elections. His opponent, then-Chief Justice Cheri Beasley, a Democrat, recognized the election as the second recount neared completion, and the Board of Elections certified the result in mid-December of that year.
Two other Republican justices, Phil Berger Jr. and Tamara Barringer, joined Newby in their concurrence on Wednesday and filed their own concurring opinion. Barringer argued that the court should suspend the normal process of granting election protests by lower courts and instead rule on the merits.
In her partial dissent, Justice Anita Earls noted disagreement with the state’s decision to maintain a temporary moratorium on election certification. He said Griffin did not meet the requirement that he “demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of his case” to warrant an injunction. He further reprimanded what he called a “signal” of the court’s “preferential findings”.
“I’m not into that signal,” he said. “We cannot reverse the election results on prospects.”
Republican Justice Richard Dietz also filed a concurring opinion, saying that Griffin’s petition should be struck down because it seeks to disqualify the ballots of people who voted legally under the laws at the time of the election. had given, which would violate the principle of the Election Law laid down in 1983. Federal case.
“I admit that this court has never accepted his version. Purcell principle is described in [Hendon v. North Carolina State Board of Elections] And, until we do, our state courts are under no obligation to act.” “But I believe the time has come,” he said.
Dietz disputed the court’s decision earlier this month to block election certification on the same grounds.
Griffin filed an election protest with the same claims in Wake County Superior shortly after filing a lawsuit in state Supreme Court last month. That court can now consider his claims. Wednesday’s order also makes moot Riggs’ request for oral arguments in the case.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is also hearing the case after Riggs’ appeal. It will hear oral arguments on January 27.
Read more
About North Carolina
