GOP Already Controls the North Carolina Supreme Court – Why Are They Obsessed With Overturning That Race?

While a single seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court, which already has an overwhelming Republican majority, may seem insignificant, this race has the potential to set a dangerous precedent for future election challenges. If Republicans use it to undermine the electoral system, consequences could be felt by voters across the country.

“I spent 15 years as a civil rights attorney with a focus on voting rights. I know what disenfranchisement looks like,” said Justice Allison Riggs, the Democratic candidate in this race, in a Democracy Docket interview. “The right to vote and to have your voice heard is a fundamental, precious right, and our democracy only works if those in charge respect the will of the voters.”

Why is the RNC Investing In This Race Specifically?

The Republican National Committee (RNC) has litigated Senate, congressional and presidential races that have significant impacts nationwide, but this state Supreme Court race is also drawing their resources.

Former North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper (D), who served in the role until the end of 2024, said Republicans are using this race as a mechanism to set a larger election subversion movement in motion.

“If they are successful in this scheme, there will be copy lawsuits across this country for races where they don’t like the result,” Cooper said. “If Republicans are successful in validating fair, legal votes past the election date like this, this will have broad implications across the country.”

Riggs also said this is much bigger than just the court race, explaining “it’s important that not just my fellow North Carolinians, but people across the country, understand what is happening here” because it “can…and will be replicated” in other places.

Also, the shifting political climate in the state could be a reason why national Republicans brought legal action in this race, Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Jamie Harrison explained during a press conference Monday.

“This fight in early 2025 lies in the great state of North Carolina, a state where voters bucked national trends down-ballot, rejecting far-right extremism,” Harrison said.

Harrison argued that the GOP is doubling down in North Carolina post-election because, during the 2024 election, a blue wave swept across the state government, with voters electing a Democratic governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, secretary of state, superintendent of public instruction and Supreme Court justice. Also, voters broke up the GOP’s supermajority in the legislature.

“What you see now is a direct reaction of the Republican Party in North Carolina to that result,” Harrison said. 

Where Did This All Start?

In 2023, Cooper appointed Riggs to the state Supreme Court to fill a mid-term vacancy. In North Carolina, a justice must run in the soonest election after they are appointed. For Riggs, this was the 2024 election.

In an extremely close race, Riggs defeated her Republican opponent, Jefferson Griffin, an appeals court judge, by less than 800 votes. He asked for recounts, and both a machine and hand recount confirmed Riggs’ victory. 

“I had no problem with recounts. I want people to have faith in our electoral system. I think recounts are a very healthy part of it,” Riggs said.

However, she said she takes issue with everything that happened after that. 

Griffin brought challenges to more than 60,000 ballots, and after the North Carolina State Board of Elections rejected them, he filed two cases in court. 

Despite bringing legal action, Griffin hasn’t publicly commented on the race. Before the election, he was active on social media but hasn’t posted on X since Election Day.

Shortly after Griffin filed his lawsuits, the RNC, the North Carolina GOP and the Wake County Republican Party joined the fray — also challenging 60,000 ballots. 

Both of them argued that for over a decade, North Carolina’s voter registration form, issued by the state election board, failed to make it clear that providing a driver’s license or social security number was mandatory under state law. That form was used until December 2023. The Republicans argued that 60,000 people who voted in the 2024 election are part of this group.

“In the 2024 general election, the Board’s errors changed the outcome of the election for the open seat on this Court,” Griffin argued in his lawsuit filed Dec. 18.

However, while Griffin specifically targeted votes in the state Supreme Court race, the RNC challenged votes in all state and local races — including ones that were already certified.

The DNC intervened in the RNC and North Carolina GOP’s case, asking a court to block their request to toss thousands of ballots. In its argument, the DNC cited state and federal laws that establish once an eligible voter is added to the voter rolls, a minor issue with their registration application is not grounds to nullify their vote.

Additionally, unlike the RNC’s lawsuit, Griffin’s case also challenges overseas voters, especially those who did not provide a photo ID with their absentee ballots, even though they weren’t required to do so during the election process. 

“The rules were posted well before the election that people who were deployed, serving abroad, didn’t have to make a physical copy of their ID and mail it overseas to a county board of elections,” Riggs said. “There was no question that that was going to be how the counties administered the election before the election.”

She added that “changing the rules after the election is unfair,” and that the overseas voters — along with the voters who used a specific voter registration form — simply did what they were told.

In a press conference Monday, Cooper said the only thing all of these people have in common is that “they’re all eligible voters who have cast legal votes.”  

Why Challenge 60,000 Ballots When Griffin Lost By Under 800 Votes?

Anderson Clayton, chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party, said in a press conference Monday that Republicans launched an across-the-board challenge to voters who used a certain registration form as their way of trying to get votes thrown out. Griffin also targeted another group of ballots: those cast from abroad.

Clayton added that Griffin is “challenging our voters that have done nothing wrong in the state,” but getting this large group of ballots tossed “is the best-case scenario for him to succeed in winning this election.”

By challenging ballots from specific groups of voters, Griffin doesn’t have to go through each individual ballot cast and find errors that would disqualify them.  While Griffin doesn’t need 60,000 votes, that’s how many there happen to be in these large categories.

Clayton also argued that challenging a huge number of ballots sets the stage for larger and larger-scale attacks on elections.

“This time it’s 60,000 ballots, next time it’s 100,000 ballots and then it’s 250,000 ballots,” and it keeps going “until no votes get counted,” Clayton said.

Also, she emphasized how dangerous it is that this “calculated effort” to overturn the election is being pushed by a sitting judge.

In a brief filed Tuesday in the state Supreme Court, Griffin made his motive for his legal action clear. He said, “if the Court agrees that overseas voters should have presented a photo identification, there will probably be no need for the Court to reach the other two election protests.” 

Griffin’s challenges to overseas voters encompass around 5,000 ballots, which would be all he needs to win the election. He said that the court dealing with the overseas challenges first could allow them to “moot the rest of the petition.”

Where Do the Cases Stand Now? 

“What we want folks to understand is, this has the potential to be very confusing…[and] destabilizing,” Riggs said. “Truthfully, we are in uncharted territory.”

One of the main points of contention is whether the cases should be heard in state or federal court. Both of Griffin’s cases and the RNC’s case were filed in state court. The highest state court, the Supreme Court of North Carolina, is the court that Griffin is running for and has a GOP majority. 

The state election board moved all of the cases to federal court because they argued the lawsuits invoked federal laws like the Help America Vote Act, the National Voter Registration Act and the Voting Rights Act, along with the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. However, while litigation is ongoing in these federal appeals, state courts are issuing rulings:

Griffin’s First Lawsuit

The state Supreme Court blocked the certification of Griffin’s race while litigation continues and agreed to consider Griffin’s case in a Jan. 7 decision. The Court set a new timeline with the briefs from both sides due by Jan. 24.

Meanwhile, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to hear arguments Jan. 27 from the state election board and Riggs as to why Griffin’s case should be heard in federal court instead of state court.

Griffin’s Second Lawsuit

The Wake County Superior Court — which represents the state’s most populated county — hasn’t issued any rulings yet in this case, which Griffin split into three different complaints, one for each category of ballots he’s challenging. He asked for the same relief he asked for in his Supreme Court case: to block the certification of his race.

The state election board submitted a similar appeal to the one in his first case, but the 4th Circuit has not set a hearing date.

RNC’s Case

The Wake County Superior Court denied the GOP plaintiffs’ request Jan. 13 to order the state election board to separate nearly 60,000 ballots and throw them out if voters’ ID information can’t be verified. The Republicans appealed the decision to the North Carolina Court of Appeals the following day.

Like in the other cases, the state election board filed an appeal to the 4th Circuit, and the court has yet to schedule a hearing.

What Happens Next?

Riggs is still a justice on the court and will continue to be while the election is resolved because, under state law, an incumbent “holds over” until a certificate of election is issued. However, she has recused herself from the cases regarding her race.

“I’m continuing to do the work every single day,” Riggs said. “But, my opponent is also suggesting that anything I do on the court somehow can or should be overturned or undone. I sign orders every single day on the court. So, I want to emphasize the potential for disruption here.”

In his petition to the state Supreme Court, Griffin argued that “this Court has expressed grave concern about letting an improperly elected official exercise the duties of her office in cases of great public significance.”

The 2025 term for the state’s highest court begins Feb. 11, so Riggs filed a motion in the 4th Circuit to expedite proceedings.

Also, Riggs said she is pushing for a quick resolution in court because, like many voters, she just wants this to be over.

“I won by 734 votes. That was confirmed by a statewide recount. It was confirmed by a hand-eye sample recount,” Riggs said. “It’s time to move on.”