It’s been nearly a month since Election Day, and the North Carolina Supreme Court race between Judge Allison Riggs (D) and her Republican opponent, Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin, remains the only statewide race that has not yet been decided .
We’ve discussed a lot in this campaign, starting with the fact that Griffin was up by around 10,000 votes the morning after the election, only to see his lead narrow to a deficit of just over 700 votes over the next two weeks , while county election boards researched provisional ballots and counted overseas/military mail-in ballots, with the latter allowed to be received until November 14th.
Concerns were raised when the original ten-day deadline for submitting final results (11/15) had to be extended by several days by order of the Democratic-controlled State Board of Elections because some precincts, including a half-sized precinct, opted out The Democratic presidential nominee, Kamala Harris, was not ready yet.
READ MORE: What’s up? Horrible optics from the NC Board of Elections as Supreme Court race still undecided
In an update to this developing story, the recount requested by Griffin has been completed and, surprisingly, he won no bottom, Riggs and Griffin each lost by 110 votes, leaving Riggs ahead by 734 votes. Before the recount is complete, Griffin requested a “hand recount in a random sample of precincts” that “will be used to determine whether a complete hand-to-eye recount of all ballots cast statewide is necessary.”
Griffin has also taken action related to the election protests He submitted around 60,000 ballots and submitted one Movement among other things, to disqualify one of the state’s BOE members, Siobhan Millen, on conflict of interest grounds and to expedite the results of his election challenges by “no later than” December 9.
While Griffin maintained an admirable level of professionalism throughout the process and explored the options allowed under state law in these situations (despite being falsely accused of trying to overthrow democracy or whatever), Riggs does not the case.
As we reported, Riggs has proven herself to be an even more partisan, activist Supreme Court justice than she previously admitted, posting a thread on Twitter/X just before Thanksgiving that essentially said that votes that may be against state Laws violated, but should still be counted because her parents’ votes are among those that Griffin questions.
Additionally, Riggs uses a web portal run by a highly partisan political group in North Carolina to send emails claiming without evidence that Griffin’s challenges are “not normal.” She also encourages supporters to reach out to the same group:
Riggs’ opponent, Jefferson Griffin, has filed protests that include election challenges, which he has the right to do.
The challenges primarily involve deceased individuals, felons, and invalid/inadmissible voter registrations.
In emails last week, Riggs referred to those challenges as “not…” pic.twitter.com/caRFqb48ig– AP Dillon (@APDillon_) December 4, 2024
However, it is completely normal to issue election challenges in North Carolina, which former North Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Cheri Beasley, a Democrat, did similarly in 2020 close race that she finally admitted a month after the election:
The protests filed in this year’s Supreme Court race are not unique. The same thing happened in the 2020 race between then-Chief Justice Cheri Beasley and current Chief Justice Paul Newby.
Beasley, a Democrat, filed 89 protests in nearly every county claiming that thousands of votes rejected by county executives should have been counted. But upon closer inspection, the more than 3,200 ballots Beasley wanted to include were almost exclusively Democrats and independent voters.
And on the question of whether Riggs displays a level of partisanship unbecoming of a member of the state’s highest court, there’s also this:
If Riggs prevails and retains her seat, she still has a decision to make pending ethics complaint filed a lawsuit against her over campaign ads in which she appeared to take a stand on the issue of abortion, in possible violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Just reading the tea leaves here, I’m not hopeful that Griffin has a chance to prevail. Assuming that Riggs is deemed the winner and runs for re-election after the next eight (long) years, Republicans better be motivated and willing to go the distance with the Republican candidate to defeat her, even if it’s Harold is the dog catcher. Because Riggs’ extreme partisan behavior should not only not should be viewed as “normal,” but it should also be viewed as extremely problematic given the position she holds.
RELATED: The pearls are being clutched after North Carolina’s Senate leader hits the caucus over the Supreme Court race
