Republicans Want To ‘Throw Out’ Thousands Of Votes In North Carolina Supreme Court Race

As North Carolina Republicans attempt to maintain their party’s uber majority on the state’s Supreme Court, the Democratic incumbent and apparent winner of the state Supreme Court race, Allison Riggs, is calling out the latest Republican stunt as an attempt to “change the election rules after the votes have been cast and counted.”

Riggs was up for reelection this fall for her seat on the state Supreme Court where Republicans already held a 5-2 majority before the election. She was challenged by Republican state Supreme Court candidate and North Carolina appeals court judge Jefferson Griffin, who, it appears she beat by just over 700 votes. But Griffin has not conceded the race, has requested at least two recounts and has filed a petition with the State Board of Elections, challenging the validity of 60,000 votes.

In response to Griffin’s challenge, Riggs filed a brief on Friday with the State Board of Elections, opposing the “legally and constitutionally improper” ballot challenges being brought by her opponent.

“Having failed to win over the voters, Judge Griffin now pleads his case here. He asks the Board to change the voting rules, decide that tens of thousands of voters failed to satisfy those changed rules, and then throw out their votes for failure to anticipate the new rules,” counsel for Riggs wrote in a brief. “While that request is legally and constitutionally improper, it is wrong on an even more basic level — one familiar in every schoolyard in North Carolina.”

“Whether playing a board game, competing in a sport, or running for office, the runner-up cannot snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by asking for a redo under a different set of rules. Yet that is what Judge Griffin is trying to do here,” the brief added. 

Last month, Griffin requested a machine recount in the state Supreme Court race, after Riggs led the race by just over 700 votes. Recounts are permitted by state law if the vote margin between candidates is 10,000 or fewer votes. The statewide machine recount, affirmed Riggs’ 734 vote lead out of the over 5.5 million votes cast. Following the machine recount, Griffin requested a partial hand-to-eye-recount which is, again, allowed under state law. 

This type of partial recount, according to the State Board of Elections is used to determine “whether there are sufficient discrepancies from the machine recount to require a full hand-to-eye recount of all ballots cast in the contest.” That count has not yet been completed.

But, more alarmingly, Griffin is also challenging the validity of 60,000 votes, in a move that experts and Democrats in the state are calling an attempt to disqualify enough voters to alter the outcome of the election — primarily due to the fact that Griffin’s challenges read as another datapoint in a broader Republican scheme to sow chaos around voter rolls this cycle. The move may also be a violation of a federal voting rights law. 

There are currently six categories of ballots that are being challenged, three of which were heard by the county boards of election last week. The other three categories of petitions will soon be heard by the State Board of Elections. The majority of these voters are being challenged because they allegedly contain incomplete voter registration and are missing the last four digits of their social security numbers or drivers license on their voter files. These election protests were filed late last month and, as the North Carolina Republican Party has argued, “highlight specific irregularities and discrepancies in the handling and counting of ballots, raising concerns about adherence to established election laws.”

Voting rights advocates disagree. 

“I think it falls into the category of one side refusing to accept the outcome,” said Bob Phillips, executive director of Common Cause North Carolina.

On Friday, the North Carolina Democratic Party filed a federal lawsuit against the state board of election, requesting an order that blocks the board from rejecting ballots weeks out from the election and arguing that Griffin’s challenges violated both the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act. Griffin has already taken steps to intervene.

“Put simply, the Protests demand that the NCSBE violate federal laws safeguarding North Carolinians’ fundamental right to have their votes counted,” the lawsuit reads. “In light of that demand, and given the prospect of further state proceedings by parties aggrieved by the NCBSE’s disposition of the Protests, this Court should issue a declaratory judgment regarding the application of federal law to the Protests.”

The timing of these challenges is, of course, significant. If there indeed was an issue with 60,000 voters who supposedly have incomplete voter registration, they would have been identified in the last year or two — not weeks after the election. Voter lists in North Carolina are public so that if there is a discrepancy, that discrepancy can be resolved before the election. 

“Any candidate could review those lists and bring any legitimate challenges long before the election,” David Becker, the executive director and founder of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation and Research told TPM. “It appears that this incredibly broad set of challenges is deeply flawed as there have been many individuals who have been identified who are undoubtedly valid longtime North Carolina voters.”

This isn’t the first time Republicans have pursued mass voter roll challenges in North Carolina. In October, a federal judge partially dismissed a lawsuit brought by the Republican National Committee, seeking to remove 225,000 North Carolina voters from the voter rolls based on what they claim are incomplete voter registrations. 

Just because that similar but separate case was partially dismissed, does not necessarily mean that the state election board, which holds a Democratic majority, will not accept the challenges. It’s unclear how the board will rule, but a decision is expected this week. Even if Griffin’s challenges are rejected by the board, Griffin is expected to appeal. 

This all stands against the backdrop of a broad Republican election-related power grab in the state, as Republican members of the state legislature attempt to strip power from newly-elected state Democrats while they still hold a majority for the next few weeks.