Federal judge orders disputed ballots counted in crucial North Carolina election
- A federal judge ruled that disputed ballots in the North Carolina Supreme Court race must be counted.
- The decision supports the election outcome favoring Democratic incumbent Allison Riggs by 734 votes.
- This ruling highlights the importance of maintaining established electoral rules and protecting voter rights.
In a significant ruling regarding the unresolved 2024 race for a North Carolina Supreme Court seat, U.S. District Judge Richard Myers determined that disputed ballots should be included in the final count. This decision supports Democratic incumbent Allison Riggs, who won by a narrow margin of just 734 votes over her Republican opponent Jefferson Griffin. The ruling came after rigorous scrutiny of election processes and claims of ineligible ballots made by Griffin, who sought to negate votes he argued were unlawfully cast. Due to conflicting decisions from state appeals courts, the integrity of the election results hung in the balance. Myers emphasized the constitutional implications of altering the election count weeks after ballots had been cast, noting potential violations of due process and equal protection rights. His order not only instructed the State Board of Elections to certify the results but also temporarily stalled any further action in case Griffin decided to appeal the decision to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. With over 5.5 million ballots cast in this highly contested race, it represents the final unresolved contest from November's general election, capturing national attention. Griffin's legal team expressed disappointment and was evaluating the ruling with potential plans to challenge it. Meanwhile, Riggs highlighted the vindication of upholding the constitutional framework in this pivotal moment for her campaign. The ruling reflects ongoing tensions surrounding electoral integrity, particularly concerning allegations that Griffin's protests aimed to retroactively change voting laws and disenfranchise eligible voters, primarily in Democratic-leaning counties. Myers firmly stated that election rules established prior to voting must remain in effect post-election to maintain public confidence in the electoral process. His ruling underscores the critical nature of established legal frameworks and the potential impact on future elections when considering changes that could impact voter inclusion and rights. It serves as a reminder of the importance of due process in electoral matters, particularly in instances where margins of victory are razor-thin and subject to legal scrutiny.