The Griffin-Riggs court saga has been a turbulent legal and political battle that has captured statewide and national attention. On the surface, it’s a courtroom fight over the outcome of a judicial election. Beneath the surface though, it's a deeper story about the integrity of democratic processes and the mechanisms that support — or challenge — our electoral systems.
The ongoing dispute between North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs and Republican challenger Judge Jefferson Griffin centers on the unresolved 2024 state Supreme Court election. Riggs was declared winner by a narrow margin of 734 votes after two recounts. However, Griffin contested the results and challenged the validity of more than 60,000 ballots. Those challenged ballots included military and overseas voters, citing incomplete registration data and lack of proper identification.
The case has now captured national attention, highlighting the potential implications for election integrity and how officials may treat certain ballots. Legal experts warn that the outcome could set a precedent for post-election challenges and the retroactive application of election laws. The election was nearly six months ago, and is the last unresolved race in the nation.
We hear where the case stands now, how we got here, and what it all means for our democratic systems. Beyond the immediate courtroom battle, we also ask about the implications for future elections across the state and the country.
GUESTS
Steve Harrison, political reporter at WFAE
Sam Levine, voting rights reporter at The Guardian
Bob Orr, former North Carolina Supreme Court justice
