<\/p>\n
\nAdvocates for democracy across the United States expressed deep concern on Tuesday following the decision by Republican justices on the North Carolina Supreme Court to halt the certification of Democratic Justice Allison Riggs’ recent electoral win. This move allows time to consider a challenge by GOP opponent Jefferson Griffin, who seeks to invalidate over 60,000 votes.\n<\/p>\n
\nIn an election that saw participation from over 5.5 million voters, and after two recounts, Justice Riggs leads by a narrow margin of 734 votes. Griffin, a judge on the state Court of Appeals, has been disputing the election results for weeks. The North Carolina State Board of Elections initially moved the case to federal court, but on Monday, U.S. District Judge Richard E. Myers II, a nominee of Republican President-elect Donald Trump, returned it to the state judiciary.\n<\/p>\n
\nDespite the board\u2019s intention to appeal Judge Myers’ decision\u2014a step they took later on Tuesday\u2014the majority of the court’s Republican justices granted a temporary stay. They stated in their order that “without a stay from the federal court, this issue should be resolved quickly as it pertains to the certification of an election.”\n<\/p>\n
\n“The Republican-led North Carolina Supreme Court is now attempting to usurp the power to select its next member, bypassing the North Carolina electorate who clearly chose Justice Riggs.”\n<\/p>\n
\nJustice Riggs recused herself from the decision on Tuesday due to her involvement in the case. The court’s sole other Democrat, Justice Anita Earls, opposed the decision, arguing that Griffin’s motion is “procedurally improper.” Even if it were not, she contended, “it should be denied because he has not met the threshold for preliminary relief.”\n<\/p>\n
\n“Griffin is attempting to retroactively alter the election rules to benefit himself. His legal challenges throw a wide net, attacking well-established election laws on both statutory and constitutional grounds,” Earls noted, criticizing the court\u2019s tolerance for such “baseless post-election maneuvering.”\n<\/p>\n
\nRepublican Justice Richard Dietz also dissented, referencing a state counterpart to the federal ‘Purcell principle’ and cautioning that “allowing post-election litigation that seeks to change our state\u2019s election laws\u2014thus disenfranchising voters who abided by those laws\u2014would invite tremendous harm.”\n<\/p>\n
\nThe reaction from lawyers, journalists, Democratic figures, and political commentators both within North Carolina and nationwide has been one of strong condemnation.\n<\/p>\n
\nWith its decision to stay proceedings and set a schedule for upcoming filings, “the state\u2019s highest court is paving the way to possibly overturn the election results, potentially handing the position to Riggs\u2019 Republican challenger,” observed Ari Berman, the national voting rights correspondent for Mother Jones<\/em>.\n<\/p>\n \nBerman also highlighted the broader and national implications of this dispute:\n<\/p>\n \nSecuring a victory for Riggs could enable Democrats to reclaim control of the court\u2019s majority post-2028, which would position them to oversee the state\u2019s redistricting in 2031. This is crucial given that the current majority upheld gerrymandered maps crafted by the Republican-led state legislature, which enabled Republicans to secure enough U.S. House seats in November to maintain their Congressional majority and continue one-party rule in Washington, D.C.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n \nMarc Elias, a prominent Democratic election attorney, voiced his concerns on social media, describing the GOP\u2019s efforts as “the most flagrant post-election disenfranchisement since Trump\u2019s 2020 legal challenges. This time, they might succeed, and the mainstream media is largely overlooking it.”\n<\/p>\n \nFormer U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., now chair of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, labeled the court\u2019s actions as “alarming” and emphasized that “the vote represents the voice and power of the people. It is not for a court to determine the outcome of an election. In a functional democracy, the will of the people, as expressed through their votes, must prevail.”\n<\/p>\n \n“If the North Carolina Supreme Court discards legitimate ballots, it could effectively overturn the results of a legitimate election, echoing the objectives of those behind the violent coup attempt at our nation\u2019s capital four years ago,” Holder stated, referring to the January 6, 2021, insurrection. “Such actions must not be tolerated.”\n<\/p>\n \nHe further expressed concern that the recent actions of the court signify a “continuing erosion of democracy in North Carolina,” underscoring the “audacious, anti-democratic move to halt the certification of a legitimate election while the court considers whether to discard 60,000 legally cast votes.”\n<\/p>\n \nThe News & Observer<\/em> reported on Tuesday that “the extensive list of challenged voters included everyone from assistants to state lawmakers to Riggs’ own parents.”\n<\/p>\n \nAccording to the North Carolina newspaper:\n<\/p>\n \nAn analysis by the News & Observer<\/em> revealed that Black voters were twice as likely to have their votes challenged as white voters. The most significant challenge, according to Griffin, involved voters who lacked a driver’s license number or Social Security number on record, arguing this could allow ineligible individuals to vote. However, state election officials countered that there are numerous legitimate reasons a voter might not have those identifiers on file.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n \nFormer Democratic Governor Roy Cooper remarked on Tuesday, “Riggs won, and the recount confirmed it. Republicans are trying to discard thousands of valid votes because they dislike the outcome. This issue transcends partisan politics\u2014it\u2019s about ensuring every vote counts and preserving the integrity of our elections.”\n<\/p>\n \nThis clash over the North Carolina Supreme Court is emblematic of what The New York Times<\/em> has described as the “bar-fight nature of politics in the state,” where voters also chose Democratic Governor Josh Stein to succeed the term-limited Cooper and broke the GOP supermajority in the General Assembly last November\u2014prompting last-ditch efforts by Republican legislators to limit Stein’s powers.\n<\/p>\n \nAnderson Clayton, chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party, declared on Tuesday, “Justice Riggs legitimately won her seat, and she deserves her certificate of election. We are in this situation solely because Jefferson Griffin refuses to accept the will of the people. He is determined to overturn this election, but we are confident that the evidence will continue to prove, as it did in multiple recounts, that she is the rightful victor.”\n<\/p>\n \nJaime Harrison, the outgoing Democratic National Committee (DNC) chair, also spoke out, condemning “the monthslong, anti-democratic campaign funded by taxpayers against Justice Allison Riggs.”\n<\/p>\n \n“The Republican-led North Carolina Supreme Court is now trying to seize the authority to choose its next member instead of respecting the choice made by the voters of North Carolina,” he said. “These shameless attacks on the voters of North Carolina are an affront to the democratic principles and rule of law that form the foundation of this country.”\n<\/p>\n \nHarrison also referenced the deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters in 2021, noting that “just a day after the four-year anniversary of January 6, Republicans are once again openly trying to overturn an election.”\n<\/p>\n \nBen Wikler, a candidate for the next DNC chair, commented on Tuesday that “the crisis in democracy didn\u2019t end with Trump\u2019s victory\u2014it has intensified. When North Carolina\u2019s state Supreme Court is blocking the certification of its own election, it\u2019s clear our democratic house is on fire.”<\/p>\n\n\n