The North Carolina Court of Appeals will hold a hearing Friday on whether to change the results of the 2024 state supreme court election. Democratic Justice Allison Riggs won by 734 votes—despite all of the Republicans’ dirty tricks. But her GOP challenger, Judge Jefferson Griffin, is refusing to concede. Griffin sits on the Court of Appeals, and he wants his colleagues to retroactively change election rules, throw out tens of thousands of votes in Democratic counties and declare him the winner.
If he prevails, it would deal a major blow to democracy in the Tar Heel State — and would signal to Republicans nationwide that using partisan justices to reverse election results is a viable strategy.
Griffin’s alarming litigation has bounced back and forth between trial and appellate courts, both state and federal. After a state court judge ruled against Griffin, he asked the Court of Appeals — where Republicans hold a 12-3 majority — to overturn that decision.
There’s a good chance that the appeals court gets the final say on Griffin’s anti-democratic power grab. The court’s decision can be appealed to the state Supreme Court. But even if the high court takes the case, the justices could split 3-3 and leave the Court of Appeals with the final word. The Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals could intervene, if it believes the state is violating federal law by retroactively changing election rules.
Riggs asked the entire state appeals court to hear the case en banc, but it declined. And Republican Chief Judge Chris Dillon chose three judges for a panel. One member of the panel, Toby Hampson, is a Democrat.
North Carolinians must show up at the courthouse on Friday to remind Judges Gore, Hampson and Tyson that, unlike federal judges, they are accountable to the voters.
The two other judges are Republicans, Judges Fred Gore and John Tyson. Gore is the only Black Republican elected statewide since controversial former Lt. Governor Mark Robinson left office. Gore ran a “joint campaign” with Griffin and other GOP appellate court candidates in 2020. It was the first time that judges had campaigned together on a party platform. One of them, Justice Phil Berger Jr., said of his fellow Republicans at the time, “We’re all on the same team… We all have on the same jersey. We have the same judicial philosophy. And we’re all conservative!”
Judge Tyson was first elected to the Court of Appeals in 2000, then lost his bid for reelection in 2008, only to be elected again in 2014. In 2021, Tyson was accused of trying to hit a protester with his car. Police released a video of Tyson’s vehicle circling the median twice, entering the median of a traffic circle, and driving over the words “Black Lives Do Matter.” Tyson then drove within a few feet of the protesters. The judge was charged with assault with a deadly weapon, but the charges were dismissed. He was reelected in 2022.
Most of Griffin’s arguments were rejected by courts and election officials from both parties before the election. He argues that election officials “broke the law” by not always including social security or driver’s license numbers on voter registration forms. Riggs points out that those rules had been in place for decades and now — after Griffin lost the election — he wants the Court of Appeals to retroactively change the rules for the 2024 election.
The Southern Coalition for Social Justice, which Riggs led before she was appointed to the bench in 2023, filed an amicus brief on behalf of the 65,000 voters whose ballots could be thrown out. SCSJ pointed out that these voters are more likely to be people of color.
“Judge Griffin fails to allege any evidence that even a single one of these voters is actually ineligible to vote in North Carolina — only that they should have anticipated his challenges and followed an alternative, hypothetical set of rules when casting their ballot,” the brief notes. SCSJ argues that accepting Griffin’s argument would “fundamentally destabilize” elections in the state.
Thousands of people recently protested Griffin’s election denial in events across the state. And some of the 65,000 voters targeted by Griffin are speaking out in defense of their right to vote.
”If my ballot is retroactively discarded under Griffin’s protest, I will feel outraged because we are supposed to be a democracy,” Anna Louise Richards, a 74-year-old Black woman who could be disenfranchised by Griffin, said in a sworn affidavit. “My ancestors fought hard for me to have this right… It is sacred for me.”
North Carolinians must show up at the courthouse on Friday to remind Judges Gore, Hampson and Tyson that, unlike federal judges, they are accountable to the voters. Tyson and three other GOP Court of Appeals judges who ran with Griffin in 2020 will be on the ballot in 2028, when voters could elect a new, pro-democracy majority to the state supreme court. For now, voters — not judges — still decide who sits on North Carolina’s courts.
Billy Corriher is the state courts manager for People’s Parity Project and a longtime advocate for fair courts and progressive judges. As a Democracy Docket contributor, Billy writes about voting and election state court cases in North Carolina and across the country.