Trump-Appointed Chief Judge In North Carolina Saves Democracy In That State— At Least For Now

Griffin Finally Concedes— No More Appeals

Last year North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs had a tough reelection bid against Republican Jefferson Griffin. But, in the end (including 2 recounts) she beat him 2,770,412 (50.01%) to 2,769,678 (49.99%)— 734 votes out of 5,540,090 cast. Griffin has been whining to court after court that ballots from overseas military voters and U.S. citizens born abroad who voted under long-standing state law should be disqualified. The GOP-aligned North Carolina Supreme Court and North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled that those voters must cure their ballots by providing photo ID after the fact, or their votes would not count. 

On Monday, Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Myers, a Trump appointee, ruled that Griffin cannot “change the rules of the game after it had been played.” Eduardo Medina and Emily Cochrane reported that Myers “ordered the North Carolina Board of Elections to certify the results… rejecting efforts from the Republican challenger to throw out thousands of votes… [Myers] ordered that all the challenged ballots should be counted. Not doing so would violate the constitutional due process rights of those voters, he said. ‘You establish the rules before the game,’ Judge Myers, a Trump appointee, wrote in his 68-page ruling. ‘You don’t change them after the game is done.’… He gave Griffin seven days to appeal.”

If Judge Myers’s ruling stands, it will bring closure to an election purgatory that has lasted nearly six months. But election experts warn that the extraordinary series of challenges from Judge Griffin, as well as an openness from the courts to entertain the lawsuits, has already created a blueprint for future efforts to overturn elections.

And he challenged nearly 300 voters who he said were “Never Residents” because they had never lived in North Carolina but were registered to vote there. “Never Residents” typically include people working overseas or children of military parents who turn 18 while their family is stationed abroad. North Carolina passed a law in 2011 allowing such people to vote in the state, but Judge Griffin had argued against it.

In April, the State Supreme Court partially agreed with Judge Griffin, ruling that the military and overseas ballots should be verified, and that the votes from “Never Residents” should be thrown out. Justice Riggs, who has recused herself from the case, appealed the ruling to the federal court.

On Monday, Judge Myers ordered the elections board not to take any other action besides certifying the results. The “retroactive invalidation” of military and overseas ballots would be a violation of those voters’ due process rights, he wrote.

And without an opportunity to challenge their characterization as “Never Residents,” Judge Myers added, there would be “an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote” for those people.

The case, Judge Myers wrote, was a question of whether the U.S. Constitution “permits a state to alter the rules of an election after the fact and apply those changes retroactively to only a select group of voters.” It also presented the question of whether a state could “redefine its class of eligible voters but offer no process to those who may have been misclassified as ineligible.”

“To this court, the answer to each of those questions is ‘no,’” he wrote.

This legal battle underscores the fragility of democratic institutions when partisan interests seek to override established electoral laws. The attempt to retroactively disqualify ballots from overseas military personnel and U.S. citizens born abroad not only threatens to disenfranchise lawful voters but also sets a dangerous precedent for altering election rules after the fact. Such actions erode public trust in the democratic system and undermine the fundamental principle that every legitimate vote should count. Funny how it’s always Republicans doing this kind of thing; never Democrats. The judiciary's role should be to uphold the law impartially, not to serve partisan interests. 

In April 2023, the North Carolina Supreme Court, with a Republican majority, reversed its earlier stance, allowing for partisan gerrymandering in the state's congressional and legislative maps. This decision has led to ongoing federal lawsuits challenging the new maps on grounds of racial bias and partisan unfairness. A consolidated trial for these cases is anticipated in June 2025, which could result in the redrawing of districts for the 2026. Based on the new maps, last year’s congressional elections eliminated the seats of Democrats Kathy Manning, Wally Nickel and Jeff Jackson, who were replaced by Republicans Addison McDowell, Brad Knott and Tim Moore.

The composition of the court, therefore, holds substantial sway over the state's political landscape and a shift in the phiosophical— or partisan— balance will likely impact decisions on redistricting, voting rights and other pivotal issues.

This morning, Griffin finally admitted Riggs beat him and conceded.  North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson: “Attorney General Jeff Jackson released the following statement on Griffin v. Riggs: “North Carolina Supreme Court candidate Jefferson Griffin just conceded the election— six months, and three rounds of vote tallies, after he lost. Our office led the legal defense of this election, pushing back against an effort to throw out tens of thousands of lawful votes. But let’s be clear— this never should have happened. There was no sound legal basis for trying to change the rules after the fact. From the beginning, it was an attempt to twist the law to reverse the outcome of a legitimate election. And it put tens of thousands of lawful votes at risk— including ballots from military servicemembers and long-time North Carolinians who followed the rules and voted lawfully. This attack didn’t work, but there’s a real risk that other losing candidates might try the same attack in the future. We will always defend your right to vote— and the lawful outcomes of elections.”