Although the 2024 North Carolina Supreme Court election was almost 100 days ago, the winner remains uncertified. The election has been marred by a series of challenges that have yet to be resolved. On December 13, 2024, the State Board of Elections dismissed the challengers’ earlier challenge, and on February 7, 2025, the Wake County Superior Court judge affirmed that dismissal. That Superior Court order has now been appealed.
Led by Jefferson Griffin and other Republican candidates, the challengers have raised three primary concerns regarding the election results, where Griffin lost by only 734 votes out of the 5.5 million cast.
Challengers’ Concerns
Invalid Ballots Due to Incomplete Voter Registration Records: The challengers argue that over 60,000 ballots were cast by voters whose registration records lacked either a driver’s license number or the last four digits of a social security number. They contend that these omissions render the ballots invalid, as they believe these voters did not provide the necessary identification when registering to vote.
Overseas Citizens’ Eligibility Based on Parents’ Residency: Another point of contention is the eligibility of overseas citizens to vote based on their parents’ previous residency in North Carolina. The challengers assert that these voters, who have never resided in the United States, should not be allowed to vote in North Carolina elections, despite state law provisions that permit such voting.
Military and Overseas Citizens Not Providing Photo ID: The final challenge concerns military and overseas citizens who did not include a photocopy of a photo ID with their absentee ballots. The challengers argue that this omission violates the requirements for absentee voting, although the relevant statutes do not mandate such a requirement for these voters.
Election Board’s Ruling
The North Carolina State Board of Elections has dismissed these challenges, citing several reasons:
Non-Compliance with Service Requirements: The Board found that the challengers failed to properly serve the affected voters with notice of the protests. The method of service used—a postcard with a QR code—was deemed insufficient to meet the legal requirements for notifying voters of the challenges against their ballots.
Lack of Probable Cause: The Board concluded that the protests did not establish probable cause to believe that a violation of election law or misconduct occurred. The allegations regarding incomplete voter registration records were found to lack sufficient factual basis, as the absence of certain data in the voter registration database does not necessarily indicate an incomplete registration.
Legal Allowances for Challenged Voting Methods: The Board emphasized that the voting methods challenged by the protesters are legally permissible. For instance, the eligibility of overseas citizens to vote based on their parents’ residency is explicitly allowed under North Carolina law. Similarly, military and overseas citizens are not required to provide a photo ID with their absentee ballots under the applicable statutes.
Earlier this month Griffin filed an appeal of the Superior Court’s order affirming the State Election Board’s dismissal. We wait to see if Griffin has success in his appeal process, which, at this point, seems to be a long shot.
Josiah Contarino is counsel at Dhillon Law Group Inc. where he practices election law, commercial litigation, First Amendment, Second Amendment, and defamation, and election law matters in state and federal courts.
