RALEIGH, N.C. — In a tightly contested Supreme Court race in North Carolina, the Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin faced significant legal obstacles on Friday. A federal judge ruled against his request to stop the State Board of Elections from declaring Democratic Associate Justice Allison Riggs as the winner of their November election.
U.S. District Judge Richard Myers denied Griffin’s attorneys’ plea for a temporary restraining order that would have halted the board from issuing the official certification. Meanwhile, the state elections board dismissed various election-related protests filed by Griffin across multiple counties, as well as by three other GOP candidates dealing with narrow margins in their own races.
The Democratic-controlled board, voting along party lines, determined that the scale of the challenges made was insufficient to overturn the results. The total number of alleged ineligible votes was considerably smaller than the leads enjoyed by Riggs and the other three Democratic legislative candidates involved. After recounts, Riggs had a lead of 734 votes over Griffin from a total of over 5.5 million ballots cast. The margins in other nearby races ranged from 128 to 228 votes.
Board Chair Alan Hirsch made it clear that even if all grievances were resolved in favor of Griffin and the other protestors, the outcome of the elections would not be altered. The Supreme Court race and two of the legislative races that faced protests have not yet been officially called.
This week, Griffin sought judicial intervention regarding a much larger number of ballots, claiming that over 60,000 votes should be disqualified from the count. His legal team contended that this action would potentially secure a win for him.
The majority of those ballots were cast by voters whose registration records may lack proper identification, including driver’s licenses or complete Social Security numbers, requirements that have been enforced in the state for two decades. Riggs’ campaign, along with her supporters, accused Griffin of trying to invalidate the election by disregarding valid votes and is urging him to concede the race.
Riggs, who is one of two Democrats on the seven-member court, is seeking an eight-year term. Griffin’s legal representatives informed Judge Myers that an immediate restraining order was necessary because the elections board was on the verge of certifying Riggs’ victory in the coming days. However, Myers indicated that the certification was not as imminent as claimed, with the board mentioning that it would not issue any certificates before January 3.
Myers stated that Griffin’s lawyers had not established a compelling case for immediate harm pending the board’s official response. This ruling came shortly after Griffin sought intervention from the state Supreme Court following the elections board’s rejection of other protests concerning voter eligibility issues related to identification requirements and military and overseas voters.
Griffin’s concerns about the dismissed ballots revolved around claims that certain early and absentee votes should not count due to the death of voters before Election Day or allegations of felons voting while still serving sentences. Some board members suggested that the decision to dismiss was premature, especially with ongoing litigation regarding the 60,000-plus ballots.
Griffin retains the right to appeal the board’s rulings in court, and other candidates involved can request the legislative chamber they wish to serve in to resolve electoral disputes. In one undecided legislative race, Republican state Rep. Frank Sossamon is trailing Democratic contender Bryan Cohn. A win for Cohn could put the Republicans just one seat short of maintaining a veto-proof majority in the General Assembly when the new session begins next month.
Prior to the board’s decision, Sossamon expressed willingness to seek assistance from the House if any state legal determination raised doubts about his election outcome.
