Posted on 04/07/2025 10:50:31 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
An appeals court in North Carolina is requiring more than 65,000 voters in the hotly contested state Supreme Court race to provide proof of identity in order for their votes to be counted. The ruling could potentially swing the outcome of the race in favor of Republican candidate Judge Jefferson Griffin.
The Friday decision was a win for Griffin, who challenged more than 60,000 ballots because the voters had not provided either a driver’s license or the last four digits of a Social Security Number upon registering, as required in North Carolina.
“The post-election protest process preserves the fundamental right to vote in free elections ‘on equal terms,’” the 2-1 majority opinion states. “This right is violated when ‘votes are not accurately counted [because] [unlawful] [ ] ballots are included in the election results.’ … The inclusion of even one unlawful ballot in a vote total dilutes the lawful votes and ‘effectively “disenfranchises”’ lawful voters” (brackets original).
This contest is the last statewide race to be decided in the country from the Nov. 5 election. On election night, Griffin was beating incumbent Democrat Justice Allison Riggs by about 10,000 votes. Over the next nine days, votes started trickling in that eventually swung the total in Riggs’ favor by 734 votes.
The Democrat-run North Carolina State Board of Elections has been trying to fast-track the certification of Riggs in this election, but the state Supreme Court has been blocking its ability to do so since Jan. 7.
While the court noted it could throw out all the ballots in question, it said that the North Carolina State Board of Elections was to blame for the incomplete registrations, as it did not make clear that the identification was required, as it was supposed to. The court is requiring that roughly 60,000 in-state voters be notified and given 15 days to provide the identification or have their ballots removed from the count.
“Based on precedent from the Supreme Court of North Carolina, this Court could order that those voters are without a remedy to cure their incomplete registrations,” the opinion states. “However, because the Board and the county boards did not comply with their statutory obligations to notify these voters who have ‘provide[d] enough information on the form to enable the county board to identify and contact the voter’ of the information defect in their registrations … we conclude these voters should be allowed a period of fifteen (15) business days after notice to cure their defective registrations.”
The order requires county boards of election to “omit from the final count the votes of those voters who fail to timely cure their registration defects.”
Griffin also challenged about 5,500 overseas voters who cast ballots without identification. The majority opinion determined that “their ballots have not been properly cast” as well, and they have been afforded the same ability to remedy their ballots as the in-state voters. The opinion again noted that they “could order that those voters are without a remedy to cure their failure to comply with the photo ID requirement.”
The smallest category of challenge from Griffin was “never resided” voters — a group of 267 voters who, very controversially, have been given the ability to vote in North Carolina despite never having lived there in their lives.
“[W]e conclude these purported voters are not eligible to vote in North Carolina, non-federal elections, and the votes cast by these purported voters are not to be included in the final count in the 2024 election,” the court decided.
The battle for the state Supreme Court seat is unlikely to be over. An appeal of the decision from Riggs could be heard by a full panel of the Appeals Court. With Griffin recused from the case, the ratio of Republicans to Democrats is 11-3. The appeal could also be heard by the state Supreme Court, where Republicans outnumber Democrats 5-1 with Riggs recused. Republican Justice Richard Dietz, however, did not side with the majority in two prior cases involving this election.
According to the Carolina Journal, the parties anticipate a 3-3 split at the Supreme Court, meaning the appeals decision would be upheld.
This is obviously racist. Or something.
jamming a stick in the wheel of voter cheating.
We need voter ID cards in all US elections and the mail-in ballot needs to be banned. Every European and South American country that tried mail-in ballots has now banned them because of fraud/abuse. We need to learn the same lesson here.
There is the potential here to expose a ton of vote fraud.
Excellent, whether he wins or loses, votes must be valid.
I think they should just throw those votes out, not give them a chance to prove themselves.
I say this having no idea what the outcome would be. We all need to play by the rules.
The Clerk of this Court is ordered to issue this Court’s mandate on Monday, 7 April 2025 at 5 P.M.
It is so ordered.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
Panel consisting of:
Judges TYSON, HAMPSON, and GORE
Judge Hampson dissents by separate opinion
We have all three parts of government necessary to pass such a law but they don’t seem interested.
Gee, I’m not hearing any complaints from the 65,000 on that list. Guess the ACLU is having trouble finding them?
Yes indeed. And even then it will be just the tip the iceberg.
A similar effort should be under way in the recent special election for a state Supreme Court seat, which may have repercussions in things like redistricting of House seats and legal status of abortion. But oddly, the vote on requiring voter ID at the election place was put in place as an amendment to the state constitution.
It is a little tough to reconcile these two seemingly contradictory election results.
“judge” Toby Hampson is a Democrat.
John M. Tyson and W. Fred Gore are Republicans.
Here’s Johnny “Boberts” Roberts “non-partisan courts” again...
What’s the big deal? Just go in and show them your legitimate drivers license or state ID, the same one you use for everything else.
It looks like Ms. “Abortion Abortion Abortion Abortion Abortion Abortion Abortion Abortion Abortion Abortion Abortion” is going to lose. If you saw her numerous ads you know I’m talking about Riggs. Her endless ads were literally about nothing else. The Democrat election fraud machine looks like its not going to be able to steal this election after all.
If these disputed voters bring in a copy of Obama’s long form birth certificate with their name penciled in, does that count?
Real ID is coming in May I believe.
See: Al Franken vs. Norm Coleman, Senate race 2008.
This is where it all began.
Counting votes for days after an election cannot continue.
Mailed in, harvested, fraudulent incomplete, all could be prevented. Paper ballots, voter I.D., one day election.
If you want to vote, go vote. No one is disenfranchised.
Isn't that just telling. And we have had it a number of times before. Same result.
An obvious system of vote cheating is being resisted by Republicans? For real?
What about Minnesota? Didn’t they get 100,000 mail in ballots with only the Supreme Court race marked? Another obvious cheat.
Update:
“NC Supreme Court Makes Way for Election to Be Overturned, Democrats Scream It’s Being ‘Stolen’”
“The North Carolina Supreme Court has ruled that over 5,000 overseas ballots must be cured before they can be counted in a move that is likely to overturn the November 2024 election of Democrat Allison Riggs
Riggs was initially “elected” to the state’s Supreme Court after the ballots in question were counted despite the identifications of the voters never being verified per state law. While another 60,000+ votes that were also disputed due to incomplete registrations were ruled to be eligible, the group of 5,000+ ballots that now must be cured could prove decisive. Those who cast them will have 30 days upon notification to provide a copy of their ID or fill out an ID exception form.”
Court’s Order filed yesterday. Link below:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.