The race for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court, initially considered a tight victory for Democrat Allison Riggs, is now embroiled in controversy. A recent court ruling has placed the legitimacy of over 65,000 ballots in question, potentially overturning the election results in favor of conservative contender Judge Jefferson Griffin.
On Thursday, the North Carolina Court of Appeals issued a decision that identified a substantial number of ballots as possibly invalid due to incomplete registration data, lack of required photo ID, or being cast by individuals who have never resided in the state. The ruling was a 2-1 decision by Republican Judges John Tyson and Fred Gore, with a dissent from Democrat Judge Tobias Hampson.
This decision mandates that election officials across all 100 counties in North Carolina must inform the affected voters. These voters are now required to verify their eligibility within 15 business days, or their votes may be disqualified, potentially altering the outcome in favor of Judge Griffin, who had previously contested the election results.
Allison Riggs was initially declared the winner by a mere 734 votes, securing 50.01% of the total votes against Griffin’s 49.99%, out of over 5 million ballots cast. The margin was slim enough to trigger an automatic recount. Although Griffin had led initially, Riggs pulled ahead weeks later. Griffin contested this shift, pointing to illegal ballots affecting the race’s integrity.
Judge Griffin highlighted that numerous voters failed to complete their registration by not providing a valid driver’s license or the last four digits of their Social Security number, as per the state’s 2004 law. Additionally, some did not submit the necessary photo ID, and others were categorized as “Never Residents”—overseas voters claiming state eligibility through a parent but having never lived in North Carolina.
The court’s comprehensive 37-page opinion criticizes the North Carolina State Board of Elections for not enforcing election laws effectively. It condemned the Board for employing QR codes and mass mailings for voter communication, while ironically rejecting Griffin’s similar approach for notifying voters about contested ballots.
The court asserted that the Board’s procedures cannot supersede state law, which mandates proper registration information and adherence to photo ID laws. It further clarified that the Board lacks the authority to exempt military and overseas voters from these requirements.
The court firmly stated, “To condemn a non-statutory and voluntary method of notice and means to seek additional information, which the Board has repeatedly used, is essentially throwing stones while sitting inside a glass house.”
Following this ruling, the State Board of Elections is tasked with notifying the 65,000 impacted voters, who must verify their eligibility within 15 business days. Failure to do so will result in their votes being invalidated.
You can read the ruling below:
