Translate with AI to
Is the North Carolina Court Disregarding the Will of the Voters?
Is an electoral process rigged only when an ultra-conservative candidate loses? That seems to be the message from the NC Supreme Court.

Is an electoral process rigged only when an ultra-conservative candidate loses? That seems to be the message from the North Carolina Supreme Court, which, against all logic, blocked the certification of Democratic Judge Allison Riggs' victory in the 2024 elections on January 7. This decision comes in response to challenges from Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin, who refuses to accept his defeat and has embarked on the “democratic task” of discarding more than 60,000 votes.

A Sore Loser, A Problem for Democracy

In the November 2024 general elections, Riggs emerged victorious in one of the closest races in the country. Defeating Griffin by 734 votes out of more than 5.5 million cast. A recount confirmed that margin, and a second recount, partially conducted by hand, slightly increased her lead.

Despite the recounts, Griffin plunged into denial, questioning the validity of 60,000 votes cast in the contest, claiming that the voter registration forms were incomplete as they lacked a Social Security number or driver's license number.

On one side, Griffin argues that the identities of the disputed voters cannot be verified. At the same time, Democrats insist he has presented no evidence of fraud in any of the cases. Several of the questioned voters, including Democratic elected officials and Riggs' parents, have publicly defended the legitimacy of their votes.

In North Carolina, Do Courts (Not Votes) Decide Elections?

The State Board of Elections previously dismissed Griffin’s claims, who was supposed to appeal to the Wake County Superior Court. However, Griffin, as a staunch believer in law, due process, and democracy, ignored this process and decided to go straight to the state Supreme Court to have the disputed votes disqualified. Why did he do this? Simply because a Republican majority dominates that court.

Griffin's legal argument had already been rejected by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in October, which affirmed that the votes were valid and that state courts should not get involved. Nonetheless, the case returned to the state Supreme Court after a recent federal judge’s decision.

Finally, on January 7, just one day after the fourth anniversary of the January 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection, the North Carolina Supreme Court, with no more justification than solidarity with their fellow party member, voted 5-1 in favor of temporarily halting the certification of Riggs as the winner.

What’s Next?

The state Supreme Court has set a timeline for both parties to present their arguments by the end of January.

What new arguments can Griffin present beyond his obsessive fight to cling to power? It does not benefit our fragile democracy for electoral contests to be decided in courts rather than at the ballot box. Sadly, this is another example of the "sore loser" syndrome infecting our national and local politics. The cure is to defend our vote and keep these Machiavellian politicians out of public office.

Find this article in Spanish here.

Periodista, editor, asesor, y presentador. De 2016 a 2019 el periodista más galardonado en Estados Unidos por los Premios José Martí. Autor del best seller: ¿Cómo leer a las personas? dbarahona@lanoticia.com