It’s been two and a half months since the Nov. 5 election. Trump took office on Monday, and the transition of power has been completed in nearly every other race. But here in North Carolina, the dispute over who won the race for a seat on the state Supreme Court continues to drag on.
There’s no question of who won the race in the traditional sense. After two recounts, incumbent Democrat Alison Riggs held onto — and even improved — her narrow lead of around 700 votes over Republican Jefferson Griffin.
What’s in doubt is the fate of some 60,000 North Carolina ballots that Griffin argues should be discounted because of missing driver’s license or Social Security numbers.
It’s a legal theory originating from the conservative activist group Election Integrity Network, led by Trump lawyer Cleta Mitchell, who helped the president in his attempt to overturn the 2020 election. The theory was labeled extreme by leaders within the organization itself and was rejected by state election officials and a federal judge prior to last year’s election.
Statistical analyses have found that the challenged voters are disproportionately more likely to be Democrats and Black. And many have wondered why Republicans would go to such lengths to challenge election results for a seat on a court where they already hold a 5-2 majority.
Oral arguments for the case are set to begin Monday before the 4th Circuit’s Court of Appeals, just two weeks before the North Carolina Supreme Court is scheduled to begin its new term.
GUESTS:
Rusty Jacobs, voting and election integrity reporter at WUNC
Miles Parks, Washington correspondent at NPR
John Korzen, Director of the Appellate Advocacy Clinic and Associate Professor for Legal Writing at Wake Forest University School of Law
