- The North Carolina Supreme Court has issued a temporary stay in the election dispute involving a seat on the state's highest court.
- The stay blocks the State Board of Elections from certifying appointed incumbent Democrat Allison Riggs as the winner against Republican Jefferson Griffin.
- Griffin and the elections board will file competing briefs between Jan. 14 and Jan. 24 before the state Supreme Court decides whether to issue a writ of prohibition Griffin requested. He is challenging more than 60,000 ballots cast in the recent election.
- The State Board of Elections is also pursuing the case at the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals. That court has set briefing deadlines for February and March.
The North Carolina Supreme Court has issued a temporary stay in an election dispute involving a seat on the state’s highest court. The stay blocks the State Board of Elections from certifying appointed incumbent Democrat Allison Riggs as the winner of the Nov. 5 election against Republican Jefferson Griffin.
The court split, 5-1, in its decision Tuesday. The court’s five Republicans agreed to grant the stay. Democratic Justice Anita Earls dissented. Riggs was recused from the vote.
Griffin had asked Monday evening for the stay. Without a court order, the elections board was scheduled to certify the election result on Friday. Riggs leads Griffin by 734 votes out of more than 5.5 million ballots cast. Griffin had argued in court filings that certification would have “mooted” his challenges against more than 60,000 ballots statewide. Griffin seeks a an order called a writ of prohibition that would block the elections board from counting ballots he has labeled “unlawful.”
The state Supreme Court issued its order Tuesday as the elections board continued to pursue an appeal of a federal court order in the case. The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to hear the election dispute, but its schedule calls for an opening brief on Feb. 18 and a response brief on March 20.
“On 6 January 2025, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina remanded the matter to this Court,” according to the state Supreme Court order signed by Justice Trey Allen. “Even though we received notice from the Board of Elections of its appeal of the order from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, in the absence of a stay from federal court, this matter should be addressed expeditiously because it concerns certification of an election.”
“Therefore, petitioner’s motion for temporary stay is allowed,” the order continued.
The state Supreme Court, “upon its own motion,” set an “expedited” briefing schedule for the case. Griffin must file his opening brief by Jan. 14. The elections board must respond by Jan. 21, and Griffin can reply to the board’s arguments by Jan. 24.
Earls dissented “on the grounds that the standard for a temporary stay has not been met here, where there is no likelihood of success on the merits and the public interest requires that the Court not interfere with the ordinary course of democratic processes as set by statute and the state constitution.”
Griffin had filed paperwork with the state Supreme Court Monday evening after US Chief District Judge Richard Myers sent the case back to that court from his federal courtroom.
“Now that the case is back in this Court, an immediate stay is necessary,” Griffin’s lawyers wrote to North Carolina’s highest state court.
“To date, the State Board has taken every step possible to prevent our state courts from deciding the state-law questions that Judge Griffin has raised. Judge Griffin anticipates that the Board will continue to do so unless it is stopped. Not five hours after the remand order was entered on 6 January 2025, the Board had already filed a notice of appeal, and will no doubt seek to have this Court enjoined from proceeding, despite the unprecedented nature of the Board’s arguments,” the court filing continued.
“Without an immediate stay of certification by the Board — one issued as early as possible — the Board is likely to find new obstacles that procedurally bar any court from reaching the merits of Judge Griffin’s election protests. While Judge Griffin continues to clear the procedural obstacles thrown up by the Board, the Board will press toward certifying the election. An immediate stay is necessary to protect this Court’s certain jurisdiction to consider the petition for a writ of prohibition,” Griffin’s lawyers wrote.
Griffin filed paperwork on Dec. 18 asking the state Supreme Court to issue a writ of prohibition to block certification of the election result. The state board removed the case to federal court the following day.
The case sat in Myers’ court until his ruling Monday evening.
“In this removed state action, a sitting state court judge seeks a writ of prohibition (a form of judicial relief authorized by the state constitution) from the state supreme court that would enjoin the state board of elections from counting votes for a state election contest that were cast by voters in a manner allegedly inconsistent with state law,” Myers wrote in a 27-page order. “Should a federal tribunal resolve such a dispute? This court, with due regard for state sovereignty and the independence of states to decide matters of substantial public concern, thinks not.”
Myers “abstains from deciding Griffin’s motion” and “remands this matter to North Carolina’s Supreme Court,” the order explained.