The People v. Griffin: The North Carolina Supreme Court and the Last Undecided Race of the 2024 Election.

On November 5, 2024, more than 150 million Americans went to the polls to cast their ballots for federal, state, and local officials in what is one of the largest displays of democracy in the world. Within a few weeks, state election officials certified the results of most races, and those elected began working in their positions by early 2025. However, over three months since election day, the outcome of one highly contentious election remains uncertain. Democrat Allison Riggs ran to be re-elected to the North Carolina Supreme Court against Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin. Riggs appeared to have emerged victorious on election night, holding a slim lead of approximately 700 votes over Griffin. Griffin, though, contests the result of the election, attempting to throw out more than 60,000 ballots. Although the North Carolina Board of Elections rejected the claim that these ballots were cast illegally, the election remains unresolved. Ultimately, the state’s Republican-majority Supreme Court will likely determine the outcome. Griffin’s unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud and election interference are the latest in a series of attacks by conservative politicians on the integrity of American elections and the will of the voters.

Griffin’s challenge to the results of the state Supreme Court election is focused on roughly 60,000 ballots which he alleges were cast by people who are not properly registered to vote. In a petition to the North Carolina Supreme Court, Griffin writes, “Since 2004, state law has required voter applicants to provide their driver’s license or social security number before lawfully registering to vote. However, the State Board chose to ignore this law for decades. Thus, approximately 60,000 people cast votes in the protested judicial race without providing that statutorily required information on their voter applications.” However, this inconsistency was likely the result of state administrative error rather than voters misreporting information, and a federal judge dismissed a similar petition by the North Carolina GOP who used the same rationale in attempting to remove hundreds of thousands of voters from the rolls before the election.

Griffin’s challenge is not an isolated incident but rather part of a broader pattern of Republican efforts to purge voters. In the weeks leading up to the 2020 election, Republicans filed dozens of lawsuits attempting to remove voters from the rolls in swing states like Georgia and Nevada. Central to many of these legal challenges was the assertion that undocumented immigrants were casting ballots illegally, a claim echoed by President Trump repeatedly throughout his campaign. Election integrity has become a core issue for Republicans in recent years after Trump baselessly claimed that the 2020 election was stolen due to widespread fraud. Griffin has used similar rhetoric in his challenge against the state Board of Election. His petition to the state Supreme Court describes the board’s administration of the 2024 election as “lawless.” Despite these claims, multiple statewide recounts have confirmed Riggs' lead over Griffin. 

Griffin and the North Carolina GOP’s attempt to overturn the November election has not come without resistance. Voters from across the state have gathered to protest the challenge to the election results in rallies labeled “The People v. Griffin.” The ACLU filed an amicus brief in federal court contending that Griffin’s actions are the latest in a string of actions representing potential threats to democracy in North Carolina. Advocacy groups like the North Carolina NAACP and North Carolina Common Cause have mobilized throughout the state, engaging the public by answering questions about the case and providing assistance to North Carolinians whose votes Griffin is seeking to discard. Still, despite public resistance, Griffin is opting to continue his challenge as the State Board requested the North Carolina Supreme Court, which Republicans currently control 5-2, to rule on the case.

The North Carolina Supreme Court has blocked Riggs from officially retaking her seat pending further litigation. The petition filed by Griffin was granted in a 4-2 decision, with one Republican joining the remaining Democrat in voting against the stay while Riggs recused herself from the case. Currently, the case is working its way through the state’s appeals courts, and will likely be decided upon by the North Carolina Supreme Court as the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the issue ought to be settled in state court. This means that the Republican majority on the court will ultimately decide who will sit on the court for the next eight years. Given that the court has the power to shape the redistricting process in North Carolina, this case will likely have ripple effects on the balance of power in both Raleigh and Washington. The court could decide to discard tens of thousands of ballots and swear in Jefferson Griffin. Instead, the court ought to follow the precedent set by a Trump-appointed federal judge, uphold the will of the voters, and allow Allison Riggs to retake her seat on the state Supreme Court.

Wesley Horn is a first-year studying History and Economics at Brown University. He is a staff writer for the Brown Undergraduate Law Review and can be reached at wesley_horn@brown.edu.

Natalia Riley is a sophomore at Brown University, double concentrating in International and Public Affairs and Economics. She is an editor for the Brown Undergraduate Law Review and can be contacted at natalia_riley@brown.edu.