Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
The North Carolina Supreme Court issued a brief but significant order Monday that temporarily halts the enforcement of a lower court ruling requiring a review and verification of more than 65,000 contested votes in the razor-thin 2024 state Supreme Court election.
In a two-sentence decision, the high court stayed a Friday ruling from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which would have compelled the State Board of Elections to obtain proof of identification from tens of thousands of voters flagged by Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin’s campaign. That ruling gave the state 15 business days to collect identifying information or discount ballots that could not be verified.
The Supreme Court’s stay gives Democratic candidate and current Justice Allison Riggs, who leads Griffin by just 734 votes, time to appeal the ruling. The court did not clarify whether it will review Griffin’s entire case or solely Riggs’ appeal. Riggs has recused herself from deliberations.
“This deeply misinformed order threatens to disenfranchise thousands of eligible voters,” said Riggs’ campaign spokesperson Sophie Mestas. “We will continue to pursue this appeal and are committed to ensuring that power stays in the hands of voters — not politicians.”
Griffin’s spokesperson, Paul Shumaker, responded to the order by saying it was “part of the process” and “expected.”
The race between Riggs and Griffin has been one of the most closely watched judicial elections in the country. After more than 5.5 million votes were cast in November, initial results showed Riggs with a narrow lead. A full machine recount and partial hand recount reaffirmed her advantage.
But Griffin’s legal team launched multiple challenges, questioning the eligibility of over 65,000 voters, citing missing Social Security numbers or driver’s license data, and alleging issues with overseas ballots lacking photo ID — despite those ballots often being protected under federal law.
Friday’s appellate ruling, issued by a Republican-majority panel, drew criticism for potentially disenfranchising thousands. It ordered that ballots be excluded if voters failed to respond with the required documentation within the 15-day window.
With a 5-2 Republican majority, the North Carolina Supreme Court now holds the next move in a legal saga that could determine not only the winner of this pivotal judicial race but the precedent for handling voter eligibility challenges in future elections.
The high-stakes dispute has already drawn attention from voting rights groups and national legal observers, given the potential impact on voter access and confidence in electoral integrity.
As the Supreme Court considers the next steps, it remains unclear if the case could eventually be moved to the federal courts, an option Riggs’ team has not ruled out. For now, the fate of thousands of ballots—and the makeup of North Carolina’s highest court—hangs in the balance.
