The North Carolina Supreme Court Is Coming Dangerously Close to Stealing an Election
In this moment of crisis, the courts have become the final guardrail against the forces of authoritarianism that seek to undermine the will of the voters.
Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily.
For the past 81 days, North Carolinaâs democracy has unraveled thread by thread, ensnared in a high-stakes legal labyrinth. At the center of this crisis stands Jefferson Griffin, the defeated Republican candidate for the stateâs high court, who has launched a relentless legal assault in a desperate bid to overturn the will of the voters. On election night, Griffin held a lead over his opponent, the incumbent Justice Allison Riggs. However, as the full tally emerged in the following days and provisional ballots were counted, Riggs steadily chipped away at Griffinâs advantage, ultimately prevailing by 734 votes. Rather than accept this outcome, Griffin has inundated the courts with legal challenges, seeking to invalidate the ballots of more than 60,000 North Caroliniansâincluding service members, clergy, and even Riggsâ own parents. In an ominous move, the state Supreme Courtâs Republican majority blocked certification of Riggsâ victory on Jan. 7. Then, on Wednesday, it sent the case down to a lower court for reviewâbut maintained its block on the electionâs certification in the meantime. In concurring opinions, three Republican justices made it abundantly clear that they intend to nullify enough votes to hand Riggsâ seat to Griffin.
Following the election, Griffinâs initial protests were soundly rejected by the State Board of Elections, and his defeat was confirmed by three recounts. The evidence before the judges resolving Griffinâs lawsuit has revealed no widespread fraud or irregularities that could have altered the outcomeâonly speculative possibilities that fall woefully short of the high bar required to invalidate an election. Griffinâs well-funded gambit reeks of desperation, lacking any good-faith effort or legitimate legal remedy. He is asking the courts to throw out tens of thousands of votes that were entirely legal under the rules in place at the time of the election. This ploy, if allowed, would destabilize the election system, allowing losers to retroactively protest as many ballots as necessary to erase their margin of defeat. The timing and nature of Griffinâs filings suggest he is seeking not to uphold the integrity of the electoral process but to subvert the will of North Carolina voters through a cynical abuse of the courts. It is a brazen power grab disguised as a legal maneuver, akin to a child overcome by a tantrum who insists on rewriting the rules of a game he lost fair and square.
In a Wednesday night ruling, the North Carolina Supreme Court dismissed Griffinâs petition for a writ of prohibitionâan extraordinary judicial remedy that allows a higher court to halt the proceedings of a lower court or administrative agency. Such writs are rare because they permit intervention before normal appellate procedures have been exhausted. In dismissing the petition, the high court recognized that Griffinâs challenges should first be heard in Wake County Superior Court. However, the court maintained the temporary stay it had previously issued, preventing the certification of the election results. This decision, while ostensibly procedural, sends a troubling signal that the court may be sympathetic to Griffinâs baseless claims.
Indeed, the rhetoric in concurrences from Chief Justice Paul Newby and Justices Phil Berger and Tamara Barringer reveals a disdain for the collective wisdom of the electorate. Their remarks expose a troubling undercurrentâa deep-seated distrust of the very institutions tasked with upholding our democratic process. Newby opines that due to the âhighly unusualâ turn of eventsâin which Griffinâs initial lead was overcomeâit is âunderstandable that the petitioner and many North Carolina voters are questioning how this could happen.â But this is simply the fundamental democratic process unfolding as intended, with each lawful vote counted until every valid ballot is accounted for.
Newbyâs statement is perplexing, given his own experience in 2020, when he trailed on election night before ultimately defeating, by just 401 votes, his opponent, thenâChief Justice Cheri Beasley. That he lends credence to Griffinâs spurious claims, cloaking raw partisanship and personal ambition in the false garb of electoral integrity, is a stunning betrayal of the impartiality expected of the stateâs judiciary under his care. Newby goes on to wax eloquent about the scourge of âvote dilution.â For those with a keen eye for legal history, his words ring with a bitter irony; it was Newby who, just two years ago, authored the courtâs opinion in Harper v. Hallâa ruling that sanctioned the most pernicious form of vote dilution imaginable under the stateâs constitution: partisan gerrymandering.
Meanwhile, Berger echoes Newbyâs concerns, lamenting âagencies, boards, and commissions operating outside the bounds of established rules,â signaling an ominous warning that he is poised to rule in Griffinâs favor on the merits, even when there is no evidence that election officials have unfaithfully applied existing laws. Both Berger and Newby appear to be searching for any pretext or technical loophole to annul the votes of millions of North Carolinians. Alarmingly, Barringer joins both their opinions, praising âthe reasoning and philosophy well-articulated in Chief Justice Newbyâs concurrenceâ and arguing that the court should rule immediately. She strongly implies that in doing so, it should nullify enough votes to award Griffin the seat.
The dissent authored by Justice Anita Earls presents a sharp contrast. (The court typically has a 5â2 conservative majority, but with Riggs recused, Earls is the only liberal sitting for this case.) She forcefully rejects the majorityâs decision to maintain the temporary stay, noting that it âprevents the Wake County Superior Court from deciding whether Griffin is likely to succeed on the merits and whether a stay is justified.â Earls warns that such a preliminary injunction should be granted only if the petitioner demonstrates a likelihood of success, something Griffin has manifestly failed to do. She criticizes the notion that the court should entertain âlitigious losers preventing duly elected persons from taking office for months or longer.â
The litigation surrounding this election has become increasingly convoluted. In December, Griffin filed three separate legal actions contesting different categories of ballots in the Wake County Superior Court, in addition to his petition directly with the state Supreme Court. The State Board of Elections removed those cases to federal court, but a Trump-appointed judge sent them back to state court, prompting an appeal by the board to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, which is set for oral arguments Monday. The Board of Elections and Riggs also removed Griffinâs Supreme Court petition to federal court, arguing that it implicates federal constitutional rights by seeking to throw out valid ballots. However, the same federal judge remanded that case back to the stateâs high court, leading the board to appeal that decision to the 4th Circuit as well.
Riggsâ fate may now rest with the 4th Circuit. If it does not remove the case to federal court, it will languish in North Carolinaâs Republican-skewed judiciary. Even if the Superior Court rules in Riggsâ favor, that decision will go to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which has a 12â3 Republican majority. The appeals court is likely to rule for Griffin. And when that decision goes to the state Supreme Court, the best possible outcome appears to be a 3â3 split among the six justices hearing the case. A tie would affirm the North Carolina Court of Appealsâ decision for Griffin, handing him a victory.
What is perhaps most sobering amid the legal turmoil enveloping North Carolinaâs democracy are the stories of individual voters mired in Griffinâs challenges. Their stories and pleasâreflected in countless videos circulating on social mediaâemerge as a poignant reminder of what is at stake. Each of the more than 60,000 challenged votes represents not just a number but a voice, a vital thread in the fabric of our electoral process. These are not mere statistics; they are the lifeblood of our democracy. The individuals behind these votes have lived experiences that highlight the importance of ensuring that every vote is counted.
Matt OâConnell, a dedicated voter from Durham, has cast his ballot in every election for the past decade. He recalls how Griffin actively courted his support during the campaign, only to question the validity of his registration after losing. âIt feels like a betrayal,â OâConnell says, his voice tinged with disbelief. âIâve always done my part, and now theyâre trying to invalidate my voice.â
Cole Parke-West, a community organizer from Durham, carries the legacy of his military familyâhis parents instilled in him the importance of voting, no matter where life took them. For seven years, he has never missed an election and has voted lawfully each time. For Parke-West, having his vote challenged feels like an affront to his sincere commitment to civic duty.
Gabby Chiarenza, a 23-year-old recent college graduate, was devastated to learn that her vote is among those being contested. âThis is only my second presidential election, and I was so excited to participate,â she shares, reflecting on her role in advocating for young voices in politics. âWhen young people are often overlooked, voting is our chance to be heard. This challenge feels like a dismissal of our reality.â
Billy Corriher The North Carolina GOPâs Latest Ploy to Steal a State Supreme Court Seat
Patricia White, a 75-year-old from Harrisburg, embodies decades of resilience and commitment. Since turning 21, White, who is African American, has voted in every election, taking pride in her civic dutyâa right fought for in bloodshed by her ancestors. âThis challenge questions my integrity,â she states firmly. âI refuse to let someone strip away my vote. My voice matters.â
Mary Miller James, a lifelong voter with a political lineage, has never missed an election in her 20 years in Rowan County. Her father was Bill Miller, who ran for vice president with Barry Goldwater in 1964. âTo see the integrity of our elections questioned is deeply concerning,â she laments. âWe need to put aside divisiveness and focus on the real issues facing us today.â
Megan Clowse, a physician and registered voter since 2005, is baffled by the challenge to her vote. She has lived in North Carolina for years and asserts thereâs absolutely no reason her vote should be deemed illegitimate. Clowse is hopeful that the truth of Riggsâ victory will prevail. She begs Griffin to âstop lying to the people.â
The Real Goal of Trumpâs Emails Ordering Federal Employees to Narc on DEI Sympathizers I Was Kamala Harrisâ Videographer. I Wish I Could Show You What Iâve Seen. This Content is Available for Slate Plus members only One State Is Most Responsible for the Trumpian Mess We Are In Pete Hegsethâs Confirmation Process Exposes the Biggest Lie of Trumpâs 2024 CampaignAs the courts deliberate, the voices of these voters resonate, reminding us that democracy is not an abstract concept but a lived reality for millions. That this election remains unresolved nearly three months after its conclusion is a profound and shameful indictment of the stateâs democratic process and those who would so gleefully corrode it. As a North Carolina native, former voting rights attorney, and former clerk on the stateâs Supreme Court, I am deeply pained by the prospect that this court could seriously entertain the theft of Riggsâ hard-earned victory. The promise of equal democratic participation and the spirit of civic fairness, along with the dignity of allowing every voter to have their say, were achieved through the blood, sweat, and tears of generations of North Carolinians. It is unthinkable that the will of the people could be revoked by those who have sworn an oath to uphold the rule of law. The voters of North Carolina must now hold their breath and hope that the courts will do what is right and confirm the results they delivered at the ballot box. But even if they do the right thing, it will still be the courtsânot the peopleâwho will have determined the outcome of an election that was settled 81 days ago.
In this moment of crisis, the courts have become the final guardrail against the forces of authoritarianism that seek to undermine the will of the voters. But can the jurists in the state Supreme Courtâs majority resist invitations to yield to autocratic impulses? North Carolinians deserve better than a spectacle of judicial malfeasance in which arrogant jurists seek to short-circuit the democratic process based on their preferred outcomes. The future of the stateâs democracy hangs in the balance.
The Cyrus family has seen its share of ups and downs, but Trace Cyrus assures fans that his bond with sister Miley Cyrus remains strong.
Read more >> : Cick here
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Pax is often seen riding around his LA neighborhood
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
? Tennessee Rep. Andy Ogles has proposed legislation that would amend the Constitution, allowing Donald Trump to run for a third presidential term.
âI am proposing an amendment to the ...
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Off-grid cat-ski operator spots unusual object in the sky above the Monashee Mountains.
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Former NFL quarterback Brett Favre opened up about being targeted by a bounty hunting scheme by the New Orleans Saints' defense 15 years ago.
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
After Demi Moore filmed a full-frontal nude scene in âThe Substance,â she might be done showing her bare body
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
NEW chilling footage seems to show the terrorist leader Yahya Sinwar directing Hamas from the rubble of Gaza before he was killed. Yahya Sinwar was the bloodthirsty mastermind behind the October 7 âŠ
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
)
Pitt and Jolie finalized their complicated divorce years after their separation
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
&description=Brad Pitt debuts new look after finalizing divorce from Angelina Jolie Pitt and Jolie finalized their complicated divorce years after their separation %23angelinajolie) |
|
|
NEW chilling footage seems to show the terrorist leader Yahya Sinwar directing Hamas from the rubble of Gaza before he was killed. Yahya Sinwar was the bloodthirsty mastermind behind the October 7 âŠ
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
The paper review that won't put you to sleep (like the others). Join the all-star comedy cast for an intelligent and insightful look at tomorrow's headlines tonight.
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
. Join the all-star comedy cast for an intelligent and insightful look at tomorrow's headlines tonight. %23morrow) |
|
|
Twitter (X), Inc. was an American social media company based in San Francisco, California, which operated and was named for its flagship social media network prior to its rebrand as X. In addition to Twitter, the company previously operated the Vine short video app and Periscope livestreaming service
Twitter (X) is one of the most popular social media platforms, with over 619 million monthly active users worldwide. One of the most exciting features of Twitter (X) is the ability to see what topics are trending in real-time. Twitter trends are a fascinating way to stay up to date on what people are talking about on the platform, and they can also be a valuable tool for businesses and individuals to stay relevant and informed. In this article, we will discuss Twitter (X) trends, how they work, and how you can use them to your advantage.
What are Twitter (X) Worldwide Trends?
Twitter (X) Worldwide trends are a list of topics that are currently being talked about on the platform and also world. The topics on this list change in real-time and are based on the volume of tweets using a particular hashtag or keyword. Twitter (X) Worldwide trends can be localized to a Worldwide country or region or can be global, depending on the topic's popularity.
How Do Twitter (X) Worldwide Trends Work?
Twitter (X) Worldwide trends are generated by an algorithm that analyzes the volume of tweets using a particular hashtag or keyword. When the algorithm detects a sudden increase in tweets using a specific hashtag or keyword, it considers that topic to be trending.
Once a topic is identified as trending, it is added to the list of Twitter (X) Worldwide trends. The topics on this list are ranked based on their popularity, with the most popular topics appearing at the top of the list.
Twitter (X) Worldwide trends can be filtered by location or category, allowing users to see what topics are trending in their area or in a particular industry. Additionally, users can click on a trending topic to see all of the tweets using that hashtag or keyword.