- The North Carolina Court of Appeals has rejected Republican state Supreme Court candidate Jefferson Griffin's request for an order compelling a state elections board decision Tuesday on Griffin's election ballot challenges.
- The news arrived shortly after the State Board of Elections revealed that Democratic candidate Allison Riggs had picked up 14 more votes than Griffin in a partial hand recount of ballots in the recent Supreme Court election.
- With Riggs building on her 734-vote lead over Griffin, the state elections board will not order a statewide hand recount of all ballots.
A unanimous three-judge panel of the North Carolina Court of Appeals rejected a request Tuesday from Republican Supreme Court candidate Jefferson Griffin. He had asked the court to order the State Board of Elections to issue a decision today about Griffin’s election ballot challenges.
The Appeals Court decision arrived shortly after the State Board of Elections announced it would not order a statewide hand recount in Griffin’s race against appointed incumbent Democrat Allison Riggs. After a statewide machine recount, Riggs led Griffin by 734 votes out of more than 5.5 million ballots cast statewide.
Riggs gained 14 more votes than Griffin in a partial hand recount of selected Election Day precincts and early-voting sites across North Carolina, the elections board announced Tuesday.
State law does not “provide express authority for this Court to issue a writ of mandamus” to the elections board, according to the two-page Appeals Court order. “Petitioner has failed to identify any authority to the contrary or otherwise vesting us with jurisdiction to issue the writ of mandamus in this case. Thus, our Court does not have jurisdiction to enter a writ of mandamus directed towards the Board to compel the manner or timing of its decision in this instance.”
Appeals Court judges reviewed a trial judge’s decision to reject Griffin’s request for a Tuesday decision on his ballot challenges. “We conclude, however, the Wake County Superior Court did not abuse its discretion by denying Petitioner’s Petition seeking an order directing the Board to decide Petitioner’s challenges prior to the scheduled 11 December 2024 public meeting,” appellate judges wrote.
Court rules dictate that the names of participating appellate judges will remain confidential for 90 days.
Riggs picked up 14 more votes than Griffin in a partial hand recount completed Tuesday. The partial recount conducted by bipartisan teams in all 100 counties produced 70 more votes for Riggs and 56 more votes for Griffin, according to a state elections board news release.
“Under state law, for a full hand recount to be ordered, Griffin would have had to pick up at least 35 more votes than Riggs in the partial hand count of the ballots in 3% of the Election Day precincts and early voting sites in each county,” the elections board news release explained.
The elections board is scheduled to meet Wednesday to address ballot challenges Griffin has filed in connection with the election. More than 300 protests targeted 60,000 ballots statewide.
The Republican candidate also has intervened in a federal lawsuit filed by the North Carolina Democratic Party connected to the ballot challenges. Democrats want a federal judge to settle the issue. US Chief District Judge Richard Myers is overseeing the case.
“The North Carolina Democratic Party (‘NCDP’) wants this Court to prevent the North Carolina State Board of Elections (‘NCSBE’) from sustaining election protests filed by Proposed Intervenor, Judge Jefferson Griffin. Judge Griffin has a direct and substantial interest in the success of his election protests: It’s the difference between winning and losing the November 2024 general election for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court,” Griffin’s lawyers wrote Monday.
“The NCDP’s effort to prevent Judge Griffin from prevailing on his election protests represents an obvious threat to Judge Griffin’s interests, and Judge Griffin cannot rely on the NCSBE to adequately protect those interests,” the court filing continued.
Griffin argued in a separate document against linking the Democrats’ lawsuit to a case already sitting before Myers. In that dispute, state and national GOP groups challenge 225,000 voter registrations in North Carolina involving prospective voters who did not provide a driver’s license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number.
A court order Tuesday moved the case to Myers’ courtroom.
Lawyers for the State Board of Elections had urged the Appeals Court Tuesday morning not to go along with Griffin’s request.
“The State Board has no clear legal duty to decide Judge Griffin’s protests on his preferred schedule,” the elections board’s lawyers wrote Tuesday morning. “Judge Griffin’s counsel conceded as much to the Superior Court, explaining that no statute or rule supports this petition. Moreover, because the State Board would violate the Open Meetings Act if it decided the protests today, Judge Griffin has no clear right to his requested relief.”
“Nor has Judge Griffin established that the State Board is failing to expeditiously resolve his protests,” the elections board’s court filing continued. “In fact, the State Board has already
hastened resolution of this contest and is moving expeditiously to bring it to conclusion. Judge Griffin has shown no good reason for this Court to take the extraordinary and procedurally inapt measures he requests, all to decide an election protest a single day earlier than planned.”