Context:

A federal judge ruled that disputed ballots in the unresolved 2024 North Carolina Supreme Court race must be included in the final count, favoring Democratic incumbent Allison Riggs. Judge Richard Myers stated that removing these ballots would violate the U.S. Constitution's due process and equal protection rights, and ordered the State Board of Elections to certify the results showing Riggs as the winner by 734 votes. Myers delayed his decision for seven days to allow Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin to appeal. Griffin contested the inclusion of certain ballots, arguing they were unlawfully cast, but Myers argued this would retroactively change voting laws and disenfranchise voters. The legal battle has drawn attention from Democrats and voting rights groups, raising concerns about potential implications for democracy and election integrity in North Carolina and beyond.

Dive Deeper:

• Disputed ballots in the 2024 North Carolina Supreme Court race, if upheld in the final count, will result in a victory for Democrat Allison Riggs, who currently leads Republican Jefferson Griffin by 734 votes after two recounts. The legal decision was made by U.S. District Judge Richard Myers, a Trump appointee.

• Judge Myers' ruling emphasized that removing ballots six months post-election would breach due process and equal protection rights, as it would disenfranchise voters who had followed the voting rules at the time of the election. He ordered the State Board of Elections to certify the results based on the existing tally.

• Griffin, a state Court of Appeals judge, had contested the election results by filing formal protests, arguing that the ballots in question were unlawfully cast. His legal team is considering an appeal, as the decision has been delayed for seven days to allow for this possibility.

• The contested ballots primarily involve voters from Democratic-leaning counties and include overseas voters who never lived in the U.S. but whose parents were North Carolina residents, as well as military and overseas voters who did not provide photo IDs. State law had previously exempted these categories from certain voting requirements.

• Democrats and voting rights advocates view Griffin's efforts as an attack on democratic processes, fearing it could set a precedent for challenging election results in other states. Meanwhile, the state Republican Party supports Griffin's goal to ensure only legal votes are counted, highlighting a broader national debate on election integrity.

• Judge Myers highlighted the importance of establishing election rules before voting occurs, criticizing any attempts to alter the rules post-election as a threat to public confidence in the electoral process. His ruling draws from broader legal principles aiming to prevent post-election rule changes that could lead to confusion and undermine democratic institutions.

• The case has significant political implications, as Riggs is one of only two Democrats on the seven-member North Carolina Supreme Court. Securing her seat for an eight-year term could influence the party's ability to regain a majority on the court in the future.