North Carolina Supreme Court Election Dispute: Federal Judge to Rule on Contested Ballots and Retroactive Voting Rules

In North Carolina’s unresolved state Supreme Court election, Democratic candidate Allison Riggs leads Republican Jefferson Griffin by 734 votes, but Griffin’s challenge of up to 5,700 ballots (potentially affecting 1,675) has delayed certification. A state Supreme Court order on January 7, 2025, blocked certifying Riggs as the winner, following Griffin’s claims that some voters, particularly overseas and military voters, did not meet state constitutional requirements or provide required photo ID. State courts ruled that voters who never resided in North Carolina cannot vote in state elections and mandated a 30-day period for overseas voters to submit photo ID.

The dispute is now before US Chief District Judge Richard Myers, with all parties submitting briefs by April 21, 2025. Riggs, the State Board of Elections, the Democratic Party, and activist groups argue that retroactively applying new voter ID rules violates federal law, including the Constitution and the National Voter Registration Act, by disenfranchising voters who followed rules in place during the election. They accuse Griffin of targeting likely Democratic voters to overturn the election result. Griffin’s team defends the state court rulings, asserting they uphold the state constitution’s “plain language” and election code.

The State Board of Elections and others have appealed to the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene, while Myers will decide whether to block the state court’s remedial process. Myers has ruled that the cure process itself does not cause irreparable harm and prohibited certifying election results until federal constitutional issues are resolved. Responses to briefs are due by April 25, with final arguments by April 28. Myers plans to rule without oral arguments.

The state Supreme Court unanimously rejected Griffin’s challenge to over 60,000 ballots with incomplete voter registrations but upheld, 4-2, rulings to discard votes from non-residents and require photo ID from overseas voters. Dissenting justices called the retroactive rule changes a “judicial coup” that violates precedent and due process. Riggs remains recused, and both candidates continue serving in their current judicial roles.

Original story provided by Carolina Journal