Federal Judge Hands Case Back to State Court

In a significant development, a federal judge in North Carolina has returned the heated dispute over an election for a vacancy on the North Carolina Supreme Court back to the state’s judicial system. The decision comes amid ongoing challenges concerning the election results that have sparked tensions between political parties.

Election Results Under Scrutiny

The North Carolina Supreme Court quickly reacted to the federal court ruling by blocking the certification of the election results between Democratic Associate Justice Allison Riggs and her Republican challenger, Jefferson Griffin. Despite losing the general election, Griffin’s team has continued to contest the results, especially after two rounds of recounts confirmed Riggs’ narrow lead of just 734 votes out of more than 5.5 million cast, as reported by WUNC.

Disputed Ballots and Legal Challenges

Griffin’s challenges focus on approximately 60,000 ballots that he argues should be invalidated. The contested ballots primarily belong to voters whose registration records lack a driver’s license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number, requirements established by state law since 2004. Notably, before the implementation of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in 2002, registration forms did not explicitly demand these identifiers.

It is important to note that voters can still proceed with their ballots even when these identifiers cannot be validated. Under HAVA, individuals may present alternative documentation, such as utility bills, to register and cast their votes.

Further Complications from Overseas Votes

Griffin’s legal team is also contesting votes cast by overseas voters who may not have lived in the U.S. but are considered North Carolina residents due to parental ties. Additionally, military and overseas voters who did not provide photo identification with their ballots are included in Griffin’s objections. However, federal regulations exempt overseas voters from this requirement, as detailed by WUNC.

Back to State Court: A Legal Tug-of-War

Lawyers for Griffin, who serves as a judge on the intermediate-level state Court of Appeals, initially sought intervention from the state Supreme Court about three weeks ago. However, the North Carolina State Board of Elections swiftly moved the matter to federal court, citing the involvement of federal voting laws and rights. U.S. District Judge Richard Myers, appointed by former President Donald Trump, ruled in favor of returning the case to state supervision, noting that Griffin’s claims primarily raised “unsettled questions of state law.”

The Race Against Time for Certification

Following the federal ruling, Griffin’s attorneys sought a temporary stay from the state Supreme Court, which was granted. The court emphasized the urgency in handling election certifications due to its implications on democratic processes.

Associate Justice Anita Earls, the only other Democrat on the court, opposed the stay, arguing that public interest requires minimal interference in the democratic process. Meanwhile, attorneys representing both the State Board of Elections and Justice Riggs have moved to appeal Myers’ decision, indicating that the matter could escalate further in the judicial system.

The Stakes at Play

The winner of this election, which has gained partisan significance, will serve an eight-year term on a Supreme Court currently tilted toward a Republican majority. Among its seven justices, five are registered Republicans, raising the stakes even higher for the election’s outcome.

The State Board of Elections previously dismissed Griffin’s objections regarding the ballots, setting a timeline for confirming Riggs’ election by Friday. However, the recent developments have effectively paused that confirmation and mandated both Griffin and the board to submit legal briefs over the coming weeks.

Political Reactions and Forward Movements

Democrats, including state party chair Anderson Clayton, have voiced strong criticisms against Griffin and the Republican Party’s attempts to overturn legitimate election results. Clayton expressed that Riggs “deserves her certificate of election,” condemning Griffin’s refusal to acknowledge the public’s decision.

As the state’s election board – composed of three Democrats and two Republicans – continues to navigate the complexities of this legal challenge, the outcome may set a precedent for future elections in North Carolina, which has seen its fair share of disputes over voting rights, redistricting, and voter ID laws in recent years.