In Raleigh, North Carolina, a federal judge has decreed that debated ballots in the unresolved 2024 race for a North Carolina Supreme Court seat should be included in the final tally. If the ruling is upheld, it would signal a victory for Democratic incumbent Allison Riggs. U.S. District Judge Richard Myers agreed with Riggs and others, who contended that disqualifying potentially thousands of votes, as recent state court decisions suggested, would violate the U.S. Constitution. Myers stated that eliminating votes six months after Election Day would infringe upon the due process and equal protection rights of affected voters.
Myers instructed the State Board of Elections to certify results that, after two recounts, showed Riggs winning by a narrow margin of 734 votes over Republican competitor Jefferson Griffin. However, he delayed the implementation of his order for seven days, allowing Griffin the option to appeal to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
“The board must disregard the directives of the North Carolina Court of Appeals and Supreme Court and instead certify the election results based on the final voting period,” wrote Myers, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump.
Over 5.5 million ballots were cast in what remains the nation’s final undecided race from last November’s general elections. Griffin, also a judge on the state Court of Appeals, launched official protests post-election in hopes that removing allegedly unlawful ballots would change the result in his favor.
Incumbent Allison Riggs voiced her satisfaction. “Today, we won. I am proud to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law as North Carolina’s Supreme Court Justice,” she stated confidently. On the other hand, Griffin’s team is reviewing Myers’ order and evaluating possible next steps, as per campaign spokesperson Paul Shumaker.
Griffin urged Myers to uphold the state courts’ decisions, which required voters with potentially ineligible ballots to provide qualifying identification to maintain their votes. Riggs, alongside the state Democratic Party and some voters, argued that Griffin’s attempts were aimed at altering the 2024 election outcome by expunging ballots that complied with last fall’s voting rules.
“Rules should be established before the game, not after it,” Myers expressed through a comprehensive 68-page order. “Making post-election changes threatens to create confusion and potentially erodes public trust in the judiciary, state agencies, and electoral processes.”
Democrats and voting rights organizations criticized Griffin’s efforts, considering them a threat to democracy and a potential template for the GOP to reverse election outcomes elsewhere. Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin emphasized, “This order should conclusively end attempts to overturn a legitimate election.”
The North Carolina Republican Party, which had not commented immediately, maintained that Griffin’s motions were meant to ensure only legitimate votes contribute to election outcomes.
Two main categories of ballots are under scrutiny. The first involves military or overseas voters who did not provide photo identification, though they were exempted by a state rule. Appeals courts had allowed a corrective process to count these ballots. The second involves ballots from overseas voters who never lived in the U.S. but are the offspring of North Carolina residents. While these were declared unconstitutional by state appeals courts, Myers noted that improper disqualification of certain voters without the chance to contest infringes upon constitutional voting rights.
Griffin’s protests initially challenged over 65,000 ballots, but court decisions reduced this number to between 1,675 and 7,000. Riggs, one of two Democrats on the state’s seven-member Supreme Court, is hoping to strengthen the party’s position for future court majority gains. Neither Griffin nor Riggs has engaged in decisions regarding their election within their respective courts.