RALEIGH, N.C.— Friday, an appeals court in North Carolina went with the Republican candidate who was trailing in a very close state Supreme Court election. This decision could change the outcome of the only race in the country that is still not decided for 2024.
A group of two registered Republican judges made the decision that tens of thousands of ballots were wrongly added to the tally. This was the conclusion of a decision made by the intermediate-level Court of Appeals. But if the ruling is confirmed, most of those voters would have three weeks to give more information so that their votes can count, or the ballots will be thrown away.
There were over 5.5 million ballots cast in the race, and after two recounts, Democratic Associate Justice Allison Riggs had a 734-vote lead over Republican Jefferson Griffin. The ballots that are being questioned are thought to support Riggs.
On Friday, the judges said that the State Board of Elections made a mistake when it threw out Griffin’s election protests in December. Right away, Riggs said he would be appealing the ruling, and it should soon be heard by the state Supreme Court.
Griffin’s protests after the election called into question more than 65,000 votes in three different groups. Griffin is on the Court of Appeals right now, but he stayed out of the case discussions because some of his peers were voting in his favor.
The most popular view on Friday says that the board should have decided that ballots from each group shouldn’t be counted because they didn’t follow state law or the state constitution. The ruling also overturns the choices of a trial judge who agreed with the board in February.
The ruling backed by Judges John Tyson and Fred Gore said, “Free elections under the North Carolina Constitution include the right to an accurate counting of votes.” “Griffin has a legal right to look into this outcome through the procedures set up by law and available to him after the election.”
Most of the votes that were challenged were from people whose registration records did not have a driver’s license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number. Registrants have had to give this information since 2004, but Griffin’s lawyers say the board didn’t follow through on the rule for years. Another group was made up of voters in the military or abroad who did not send copies of photo IDs or ID exception forms with their ballots. In North Carolina, you need a photo ID to vote otherwise.
In the end, the judges told the state board that county election workers should let the voters know about these two groups and give them 15 business days to provide any missing information or photo ID. The opinion says that those votes would still count if they were turned in on time and checked.
Tyson and Gore say that the votes of the third group, which includes possibly hundreds of overseas voters who have never lived in the U.S., cannot be counted because they are not eligible under state residency rules.
The Court of Appeals A registered Democrat on the panel, Judge Toby Hampson, wrote a dissenting opinion. He said that Griffin hadn’t found a single voter who wasn’t allowed to vote in the November elections because of the rules for those races. Lawyers for both Riggs and the board said that the votes were legal and that state laws and rules that have been used in elections for years can’t be changed after the fact.
It is more important to believe Griffin’s “arbitrary efforts to call into question the votes of tens of thousands of otherwise eligible voters, without any showing that any challenged voter was disqualified from voting under existing law,” Hampson wrote.
Griffin’s lawyers have said in the past that their client thinks he’ll win if the disputed illegal votes are thrown out.
Riggs’ supporters have said that most of the votes that were challenged, like the ones about the ID law, came from counties that lean Democratic. It’s not clear how many people will try to take part in the “cure” process.
Griffin’s campaign group said in a prepared statement, “we stand by the process of giving the State Board a second chance to do its job and make sure that only eligible voters cast ballots in our elections.”
In the ninth-largest state, the eight-year term on the top court was set to start in January. In the meantime, Riggs has stayed in her place and served. She has also stepped away from the early discussions about the protests that the Supreme Court has already heard.
Riggs said that Friday’s decision was “deeply misinformed,” and that it could mean that more than 65,000 legal voters lose their right to vote. He also said that it set a bad example by letting angry politicians go against the will of the people.
There are now six judges on the Supreme Court, and five of them are Republicans. Lawyers for both Riggs and the board have already said they will take the case to federal court if they have to.
