RALEIGH, N.C. — In a pivotal ruling that could have far-reaching implications for election law and voting rights, a federal judge has ordered North Carolina officials to certify the results of a tightly contested state Supreme Court race, securing a narrow victory for Democratic incumbent Justice Allison Riggs.
The decision, delivered late Monday by U.S. District Judge Richard Myers, halts an effort by Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin to discard thousands of ballots, which he argued were unlawfully cast. The ruling ends months of uncertainty in what had become the final unresolved race from the November 2024 general election — an election that saw more than 5.5 million North Carolinians head to the polls.
At the heart of the controversy were ballots cast under rules that have since been challenged by Griffin. These included votes from overseas citizens whose parents are North Carolina residents, and military voters who failed to submit photo identification or an exemption form along with their absentee ballots. State law and administrative rules had permitted these ballots at the time of the election.
Griffin, currently a judge on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed formal protests seeking the exclusion of those ballots — a move that some critics say was a last-ditch effort to reverse the result of a race already verified through two recounts. According to the final tally, Riggs led Griffin by just 734 votes.
But Judge Myers, a Trump appointee, found Griffin’s attempt to change the rules retroactively deeply problematic.
“You establish the rules before the game. You don’t change them after the game is done,” Myers wrote in a strongly worded 68-page opinion. He added that such actions “threaten to undermine public confidence in the federal courts, state agencies, and the elections themselves.”
In his ruling, Myers blocked the implementation of decisions by North Carolina’s Court of Appeals and Supreme Court that would have disqualified certain ballots. Instead, he ordered the State Board of Elections to certify Riggs as the winner based on the official tally from the canvassing period.
Though the judge delayed the enforcement of his decision for seven days to allow for appeal, the ruling represents a significant blow to Griffin’s campaign. His spokesperson, Paul Shumaker, confirmed Monday night that the legal team was reviewing the decision and considering its next steps.
Riggs, however, welcomed the ruling with confidence. “Today, we won. I‘m proud to continue upholding the Constitution and the rule of law as North Carolina’s Supreme Court Justice,” she said in a statement.
Riggs’ victory carries political weight beyond just this race. As one of only two Democrats on the seven-member Supreme Court, securing an eight-year term allows Democrats to lay the groundwork for regaining a majority on the bench in the coming years.
The legal battle drew national attention, especially from Democrats and voting rights groups who viewed Griffin’s post-election challenge as an alarming blueprint for future election subversion efforts.
“This was an attempt to retroactively rewrite the rules and disenfranchise voters who had followed the law,” one voting rights advocate said. “If allowed to stand, it could open the floodgates for overturning legitimate results in other close races.”
The North Carolina Republican Party, for its part, stood by Griffin’s efforts, saying the candidate was merely working to ensure that only legal votes were counted. However, critics argued that the scope of Griffin’s protests — reportedly affecting more than 65,000 ballots at one stage — disproportionately targeted Democratic-leaning counties.
Myers noted in his ruling that Griffin’s challenges only covered a limited number of counties, a factor that underscored the selective and potentially partisan nature of the legal maneuvering.
Furthermore, Myers emphasized that many of the voters targeted by Griffin’s protests had complied fully with the law as it was written at the time they cast their ballots. Changing the rules after the election and selectively applying them, he argued, would violate the Constitution’s guarantees of due process and equal protection.
While state courts had attempted to offer a “cure” process for voters who failed to provide photo ID — allowing them 30 days to submit documentation — Myers rejected that approach as insufficient and fundamentally unfair.
North Carolina may certainly revise election laws for future contests, Myers concluded, but those changes cannot be applied retroactively to disenfranchise a targeted group of voters after the ballots are cast and counted.
If upheld, this ruling not only secures Riggs’ position on the bench but also sets a judicial precedent aimed squarely at efforts to re-litigate elections after the fact — a trend that has alarmed many observers of U.S. democracy in recent years.
Will Griffin appeal the decision, or is this the final word in a case that has dragged on for half a year? That answer may come in the days ahead. But for now, Justice Allison Riggs appears poised to retain her seat — and with it, a renewed sense of momentum for North Carolina Democrats.