Latest news with #Riggs'
Business Insider
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Business Insider
The 2024 election is finally over
Everyone knows that President Donald Trump defeated then-Vice President Kamala Harris at the ballot box in November. But technically, the 2024 election just ended on Wednesday, when the last remaining contest was finally decided. In the hotly-contested North Carolina Supreme Court race between Republican Jefferson Griffin and Democratic incumbent Allison Riggs, Griffin conceded after US District Judge Richard Myers ruled against his electoral challenge. Myers instructed North Carolina's election board to certify Riggs' victory in a race that she won by a razor-thin 734-vote margin out of more than 5.5 million ballots cast. "While I do not fully agree with the District Court's analysis, I respect the court's holding — just as I have respected every judicial tribunal that has heard this case," Griffin said in a statement on Wednesday. There were multiple recounts for the key judicial seat on a court where Republicans hold a 5-2 majority. Griffin challenged the validity of roughly 65,000 votes, which was more than enough to affect the final outcome of the election in one of the most competitive swing states in the country. The challenges stretched on for weeks — and then months — after the November election. Democrats called foul on the GOP effort to overturn Riggs' victory, arguing that the party was seeking to disenfranchise voters, especially in Democratic-leaning areas. However, Griffin and state Republicans contended that many of the votes in question could potentially have been cast by ineligible voters. Riggs, who was appointed to the state Supreme Court in 2023 by then-Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper, applauded the outcome while also criticizing the GOP's election challenge. "After millions of dollars spent … thousands of volunteers mobilized, hundreds of legal documents filed, and immeasurable damage done to our democracy, I'm glad the will of the voters was finally heard, six months and two days after Election Day," she said in a statement. "It's been my honor to lead this fight — even though it should never have happened," she added. Last November, Democrats performed strongly in North Carolina, easily winning the governor's race, flipping the lieutenant governor's office, and holding the attorney general's office despite Harris' statewide loss to Trump.
Epoch Times
24-04-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
US Appeals Court Halts Ballot Curing Efforts in North Carolina Supreme Court Election
A U.S. appeals court this week temporarily blocked North Carolina state elections officials from contacting voters whose ballots were disputed in 2024's state Supreme Court race and could be eliminated from the final vote count. In a 2–1 The notices would have given the voters 30 days to 'cure'—the process of fixing absentee ballot errors—the deficiencies in their ballots. 'In furtherance of federal jurisdiction, we enjoin the North Carolina State Board of Elections from mailing any notice to any potentially affected voter pending the district court's resolution of Riggs' motion for a preliminary injunction,' the order said, in part. Tuesday's order grants an emergency request from Associate state Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs, who has asked federal judges to throw out the recent rulings of state appellate courts in the case. Republican opponent Jefferson Griffin has The court's decision late Tuesday means government election workers are temporarily prohibited from carrying out a process mandated by state judges who ruled earlier this month that voters within two categories were ineligible. Related Stories 4/24/2025 4/24/2025 Most of the military or overseas voters would get 30 days to provide additional identifying information so that their votes would remain in the tally. Others, however, would be unable to 'cure' their ineligibility, and their ballots would be removed. The decision also reverses U.S. District Judge Richard Myers II's Tuesday's order stipulated that granting a stay in the case was proper, as Myers decides on arguments by Riggs, the State Board of Elections, and others in the case. On April 11, the state Supreme Court, in a 4–2 The highest state court, meanwhile, faulted the Board of Elections for not making sure the voters had presented the numbers and for 'inattention and failure to dutifully conform its conduct to the law's requirements.' 'Because the responsibility for the technical defects in the voters' registrations rests with the Board and not the voters, the wholesale voiding of ballots cast by individuals who subsequently proved their identity to the Board by complying with the voter identification law would undermine the principle that 'this is a government of the people, in which the will of the people—the majority—legally expressed, must govern,'' it said. The court order further stated that no evidence was presented to indicate that a 'significant number of the roughly 60,000 ballots in the first category were cast by individuals whose identity was not verified by voter identification or who were not otherwise qualified to vote.' Earlier this month, a state appeals court ruled that the state must provide voters with 15 days to resolve their ballots, but the Supreme Court's order reversed that decision and instead gave them 30 days. Separately, the North Carolina State Board of Elections Riggs campaign spokesperson Dory MacMillan told media outlets this week that the appeals court decision temporarily blocks a 'confusing and burdensome cure process for ballots that had nothing wrong with them,' while Griffin campaign spokesperson Paul Shumaker said that the campaign expects 'litigation of this case to continue for some time' and that the appeals court ruling will further delay the outcome. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
US Court of Appeals temporarily blocks NC ruling to throw out Supreme Court votes
RALEIGH, N.C. (WNCN) — A federal court has put another pause on the voting results of the state Supreme Court election from six months ago, in November 2024. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled in favor of Democratic candidate Allison Riggs Tuesday evening, citing that the thousands of votes cannot be thrown out until her federal court filing is completed. 'Recognizing that the district court has not yet had the opportunity to exercise its jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1443 and address Riggs' motion for preliminary injunction based on her federal constitutional claims, we grant her motion for a stay,' the court file said. 'In furtherance of federal jurisdiction, we enjoin the North Carolina State Board of Elections from mailing any notice to any potentially affected voter pending the district court's resolution of Riggs' motion for a preliminary injunction,' the file went on to say. The North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin on April 4 that over 65,000 votes were liable to be thrown out due to having incomplete information. On April 11, the NC Supreme Court ruled that tens of thousands of votes would remain in the election count that partially overturned the Court of Appeals ruling. Riggs filed a Motion for Stay and Injunction Pending Appeal on April 14 with the US Court of Appeals to prevent the 7,000-plus votes from being thrown out. The current ruling by the US Court of Appeals also ordered the NC Board of Elections not to contact any potentially affected voters until the Riggs appeal goes through. The election of the state Supreme Court seat has been quite controversial over the past six months, sparking multiple protests and advertising calling for an end to the election. In November, the results were a tight margin, with Riggs defeating Griffin by 625 votes. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Judge Griffin asks Supreme Court not to review appeals court election ruling
Supreme Court of North Carolina (Photo: The story of North Carolina's unsettled 2024 state Supreme Court election took yet another turn on Friday when Republican challenger Judge Jefferson Griffin asked the state Supreme Court to deny Democratic incumbent Justice Allison Riggs' request to review the case. In a brief outlining his opposition to Riggs' request for Supreme Court review, Griffin asked the high court to let the 2-1 ruling issued in his favor by a panel of Court of Appeals judges last Friday to stand so that the process the panel ordered — under which thousands of voters would need to come forward in short order to prove the validity of their registration documents — can commence. In the brief, Griffin — who has been challenging the outcome of the election in a series of actions since last fall — states, 'This litigation has drawn on long enough. The cure process, rather than more courthouse battles, is the pathway for restoring integrity in this election. It is now time to bring the litigation to a close and let the cure process run its course.' On Monday of this week, in response to Riggs' request for review, the Supreme Court temporarily stayed the Court of Appeals order. It's long been widely expected in political and legal circles that the high court would ultimately be forced to issue a ruling in the case – though a return to federal court remains a possibility as well. On Thursday of this week, national and state Democratic Party leaders held a press conference to denounce Griffin's efforts to reverse the election results in which Riggs holds a 734-vote lead — a lead that was confirmed in two recounts. 'What's happening in North Carolina goes beyond state borders,' Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin told reporters. 'If Republicans are successful in changing the rules post-election and throwing away valid votes, this will have broad implications, serious repercussions, on elections across the country for years to come.' Republicans hold a 5-2 majority on the high court – a gap that increases to 5-1 in the Riggs-Griffin dispute, given that Riggs has recused herself from the matter. Three of the Republican justices, in previous decisions in the case, have expressed support for Griffin's positions. In the case of a 3-3 tie in the Supreme Court — either on the motion for discretionary review or in a final ruling on the merits of the case — the Appeals Court decision would stand.
