North Carolina Supreme Court Election Dispute Awaits Key Ruling
The ongoing legal battle over the 2024 North Carolina Supreme Court election is poised for a significant turning point as federal trial judge Richard Myers prepares to issue a ruling. While no deadline exists for Myers’ decision, he has promised to act "as soon as practicable." Final written briefs from both sides were submitted to Myers by Monday.
The election dispute involves Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin and Democrat Allison Riggs, who is currently serving as an appointed incumbent. Riggs leads Griffin by 734 votes among over 5.5 million ballots cast, but her victory certification has been stalled pending litigation initiated by Griffin, who is contesting more than 65,000 ballots from the November election. This month, the state Supreme Court ruled that most challenged ballots would count, but residual questions remain about 5,700 ballots primarily concerning military and overseas voters lacking photo ID.
Griffin is requesting that Myers dismiss efforts by Riggs, the State Board of Elections, and various interested parties to eliminate a process aimed at resolving ballot disputes, arguing for the importance of state judicial authority in election matters. Conversely, Riggs’ legal team contends Griffin’s actions reflect an "unprecedented, unconstitutional" challenge to the due process that undermines voter rights. They argue he misrepresents legal principles and highlights an unjustified imposition on the state’s electoral process.
The State Board of Elections stressed the fundamental unfairness of Griffin’s requests, claiming they would compel the Board to contravene federal law. Various advocacy groups, including the North Carolina Democratic Party and the League of Women Voters, have filed briefs in support of Riggs, emphasizing fairness and due process for all voters.
As Myers deliberates, the North Carolina Court of Appeals may clarify which ballots will undergo scrutiny, and despite the lengthy dispute, both Riggs and Griffin continue to fulfill their judicial roles.
Note: The image is for illustrative purposes only and is not the original image associated with the presented article. Due to copyright reasons, we are unable to use the original images. However, you can still enjoy the accurate and up-to-date content and information provided.
