Federal Judge Upholds North Carolina Supreme Court Election Result, Rejecting Challenge to Ballots

A federal judge has sided with a Democratic justice in North Carolina, ordering the state’s election board to certify her victory in a closely contested Supreme Court race from last November. The ruling prevents the rejection of any ballots, effectively dismissing a challenge brought forth by a Republican judge seeking to overturn the election’s outcome.

Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Myers, presiding in Raleigh, issued the order on Monday, favoring Justice Allison Riggs. Judge Jefferson Griffin, the Republican trailing Riggs by 734 votes, had sought to challenge the validity of certain ballots, particularly those cast by military and overseas voters. Myers, appointed by Republican President Donald Trump, emphatically rejected Griffin’s attempt to alter the election rules after the voting process had concluded.

The dispute arose following an April 11 order from the North Carolina Supreme Court, which, while rejecting Griffin’s broader effort to discard over 60,000 ballots, raised questions about a smaller subset of ballots cast by overseas voters. The state Supreme Court, dominated by Republicans, stipulated that these voters, who had not provided photo identification as mandated by state law, needed to verify their eligibility within a 30-day timeframe.

While the state election board estimated that its compliance plan would impact a maximum of 1,675 voters, Griffin argued that the number of potentially affected voters was significantly higher, numbering in the thousands. Riggs, in response, implored Judge Myers to thwart what she characterized as an unprecedented legal maneuver aimed at overturning a legitimate election.

Judge Myers’ ruling centered on a fundamental constitutional question: whether a state can retroactively modify election rules after the election has taken place, applying these changes selectively to a specific group of voters and treating them differently from other similarly situated individuals. He concluded that such action would violate the voters’ rights to equal protection and due process under the U.S. Constitution. He stated that allowing the state Supreme Court’s ruling to take effect would create an unconstitutional disparity in the application of election laws.

The decision has been celebrated by Democrats as a victory for fair elections and voter rights. Justice Riggs, in a social media post on X, lauded the ruling as a "victory for North Carolina voters." Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin declared that the ruling should definitively end Republican attempts to overturn the election’s outcome. He emphasized the importance of upholding the integrity of free and fair elections.

However, the legal battle may not be over. Judge Myers has temporarily paused his order for seven days, providing Judge Griffin the opportunity to pursue an appeal. Griffin’s campaign has stated that its legal team is currently reviewing the ruling and evaluating potential next steps. The possibility of further legal challenges remains open as Griffin considers his options.

The context of this election dispute lies in Riggs’ pursuit of a full eight-year term on the North Carolina Supreme Court. She was initially appointed to the court in 2023 by Democratic Governor Roy Cooper to fill a vacancy. The seven-member tribunal, whose justices are elected by the voters, currently holds a 5-2 Republican majority. The outcome of this election and the legal challenges surrounding it could have significant implications for the ideological balance of the court.

The election results themselves were initially favorable to Griffin. In the hours immediately following the closure of polls on November 5, Griffin held a lead of nearly 10,000 votes over Riggs. However, as more ballots were counted, Riggs steadily closed the gap, ultimately surpassing Griffin by a narrow margin. The election saw a high level of voter participation, with over 5.5 million ballots cast.

This case underscores the ongoing partisan tensions surrounding election administration and the challenges of ensuring fair and equal access to the ballot box. The legal arguments presented by both sides highlight the complexities of balancing state election laws with constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process.

The decision by Judge Myers reinforces the principle that election rules should be clear and consistently applied, and that changes to those rules should not be made retroactively in a way that could disenfranchise voters. This principle is essential for maintaining public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process.

The future course of this legal battle remains uncertain. If Griffin decides to appeal, the case could potentially reach a higher court, further prolonging the resolution of the election dispute. Regardless of the ultimate outcome, this case serves as a reminder of the importance of vigilance in protecting voting rights and ensuring that all eligible citizens have the opportunity to participate in the democratic process. The case also highlights the role of the judiciary in safeguarding the integrity of elections and upholding the rule of law. The outcome will likely be closely watched by both parties and could have broader implications for election law and voting rights in North Carolina and beyond.