The North Carolina state Board of Elections voted Wednesday to reject a Republican challenge to throw out 60,000 ballots in a state Supreme Court race where Democrat Allison Riggs holds a narrow lead of just over 700 votes against Republican Jefferson Griffin. The Board's Democratic majority could soon certify Riggs’ victory, which would represent a significant advancement for the party amid the contested race. So far, NBC News has not declared the outcome official.
Riggs, appointed to the state Supreme Court earlier this year, emerged with the slim lead following Election Day, leading Griffin by 734 votes after both machine and hand recounts. With over 5.5 million ballots cast, the stakes are high. Griffin's legal team, dissatisfied with the election outcome, filed hundreds of legal challenges across all 100 counties of North Carolina, alleging nearly 60,000 ballots were cast illegally.
The basis of Griffin’s claims lies primarily with voter registration details, where his attorneys argue many of these voters lacked either driver's license numbers or Social Security numbers as required under state laws. “These voters were not eligible to cast a ballot without first lawfully registering,” Griffin’s campaign stated, reflecting concerns over the integrity of the election.
Specific categories of questioned ballots include those whose registration records lacked the required identification information, as well as votes cast by overseas voters who did not live in North Carolina. The Board took votes on these issues, with the Democratic majority rejecting the first two issues and unanimously dismissing the claims against absentee ballots due to missing photo IDs.
Following these decisions, Griffin or the North Carolina Republican Party retain the option to appeal this ruling. Such actions could bring the case before the state courts, where it might eventually reach the state Supreme Court itself. North Carolina GOP Chairman Jason Simmons expressed disappointment over the Board's ruling, pledging to review the decisions for potential future actions aimed at protecting electoral integrity.
Riggs’ campaign has been proactive, with the North Carolina Democratic Party filing federal litigation aimed at ensuring all ballots are counted, arguing against Griffin’s claims. “The federal law does not allow states to toss out ballots because voter registration papers are missing a driver’s license number or Social Security number,” their filing asserted, heightening the stakes involved.
Earlier this fall, Republican efforts to remove 225,000 voters with incomplete registration records were lost as the courts dismissed their case, showcasing the legal challenges faced by the GOP following the election. Given Griffin is vying for election against Riggs, with Republicans currently holding five out of seven seats on the state Supreme Court, the outcome may significantly affect the party’s future influence.
Aside from the Supreme Court race, the close race for the North Carolina House is also under scrutiny, with Republican state Rep. Frank Sossamon trailing Democratic challenger Bryan Cohn by fewer than 300 votes. Should Cohn win, it would strip the GOP of their supermajority, limiting the capacity to override vetoes by Democratic Governor Roy Cooper.
The Board’s hearing came on a day when Republican lawmakers advanced legislation affecting the elections board itself. Stripping the governor's power to appoint members of the Board, the newly passed bill stands at odds with the current system where the governor appoints three members from their party and two from the opposition. This shift highlights the tug-of-war over control of the state’s election oversight.
The intense legal back-and-forth surrounding the North Carolina elections has highlighted concerns about voting rights, eligibility, and the future of electoral processes. With the Board having determined to uphold the election results, the focus now shifts to whether the courts will uphold these decisions or intervene, potentially prolonging uncertainty over the future of the state’s judiciary and legislative bodies.
Meanwhile, the federal judge overseeing some of Griffin's legal efforts denied his request for a restraining order to halt formal election certification for Riggs. U.S. District Judge Richard Myers noted claims pertaining to ballot challenges are insufficient to change the current tally, stating, “Even if all of these claims were decided in Mr. Griffin’s favor, none of them would change the outcome of the election.”
This highlights the overarching narrative of electoral disputes and the tensions inherent within North Carolina’s political environment. With contentious recounts, legal challenges, and legislative maneuvers continuing to evolve, eyes remain on North Carolina as this story develops, underlining its importance not just locally, but across the nation.