VOTING RIGHTS

Explaining the North Carolina Election Protests 

N.C. Supreme Court candidate Jefferson Griffin has challenged the validity of more than 60,000 votes cast in the 2024 General Election. This unprecedented attempt to change the rules of voting and discount ballots after they were cast has prompted months of deliberations in federal and state courts.

Two post-election recounts have confirmed that Allison Riggs, the incumbent N.C. Supreme Court justice, leads Griffin, a N.C. Court of Appeals judge, by 734 votes out of 5.5 million cast in what is now the only undecided race in the nation from the 2024 election.

Any voter concerned about their ballot or registration may call or text the nonpartisan Election Protection Hotline at 888-OUR-VOTE (888-687-8683) with questions or contact their local county board of elections.    

Election Protests Mailer on top of decorative star shape and 'vote' buttons

These protests seek an extraordinary result: the disqualification of tens of thousands of lawful voters’ ballots and the invalidation of North Carolina election results across the state without any evidence that ineligible voters cast ballots. The protests seek to change the laws of the election after votes have been cast and thereby move the goalpost on voters who satisfied all the requirements to have their vote counted. The protesters have expressly stated they have no evidence of ineligible voting – but still seek to overturn election outcomes they wish were different. This is not what election protests are for, and not how democracy works. These protests should be forcefully rejected. 

Update (April 23, 2025) The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a temporary stay on April 22, 2025, putting on hold a prior N.C. Supreme Court decision and subsequent federal district court order for the state board of elections to begin a “curing” process for the ballots of overseas voters who were targets of Griffin’s challenges. (The N.C Supreme Court rejected Griffin’s challenges of more than 55,000 voters for supposed “incomplete” information in their voter registration files.)

The federal appeals court is poised to consider arguments soon for Riggs, the state board of elections, and other parties that the constitutional rights of overseas voters would be violated if the state court decisions uphold Griffin’s post-election challenges are allowed to go into effect.

In addition to having overseas voters from a handful of counties retroactively provide photo identification, the N.C. Supreme Court decision ordered the rejection of ballots from 260 overseas voters who checked a box indicating they “have never lived in the United States” but were still eligible to vote because of a 2011 North Carolina law recognizing their ties to the state. Many in this group are believed to be adult children of U.S. military service members. Research from Southern Coalition for Social Justice shows at least 25% of these voters likely did reside in North Carolina, and may have inadvertently checked the “never-resident” box on their ballot application forms. The State Board of Elections wanted to allow these alleged “non-residents” an opportunity to affirm their prior residency to have their ballots counted, but Griffin opposed that process and has asked the state Court of Appeals to clarify its order to prevent these voters from having any opportunity to save their ballots.

Background

Before North Carolina’s 100 counties had even finished certifying their results, protests challenging those results were filed in a handful of races – two State Senate contests (SD 42 in southern Mecklenburg County and SD 18 in northern Wake/Granville Counties); two State House contests (HD 32 in Granville/Vance Counties and HD 24 in Wilson County); and one statewide contest, for North Carolina Supreme Court Seat 6. These various protests raise largely identical issues and are being considered by the various county boards of elections and the State Board of Elections presently and through the coming weeks. Per Order of the State Board of Elections, county boards are proceeding with consideration of the protests made on the basis of death, felony conviction, or removed/denied registrations. The State Board of Elections has taken jurisdiction over the protests made on the basis of statewide election law disputes: voters whose registration records are purportedly incomplete, overseas voters who did not provide a copy of their ID (and who are not required to do so by state law), and overseas voters whose parents are North Carolina citizens but who have never lived in the state (who are authorized to vote in North Carolina by state statute).

What Should I Know About the Election Protests?

State law allows candidates to argue that irregularities affected the election process and impacted the certified results of the election. But state law requires protesters to actually prove that these irregularities occurred, and that they cast doubt on the results of the election. The simple filing of an election protest or allegation of an irregularity is the beginning of the process, not the end of it. The claims must be carefully considered, and the burden is on the protesters to demonstrate the election results were tainted. Overturning an election result is an extraordinary outcome that requires extraordinary evidence. Protesters must provide that proof if they wish to undo the results of the election.

Need Help?

Want to receive updates from SCSJ about this case? Are you a challenged voter with more questions? Let us know by completing this form.

Call 888-OUR-VOTE if you have questions or concerns about a protest or challenge to your vote and trained nonpartisan election protection teams will help you protect your rights. If you want to speak directly to a non-partisan voting rights attorney, email Jeff Loperfido, SCSJ’s Chief Counsel of Voting Rights, at jeffloperfido@scsj.org. 

purple halftone hand holding a cellphone with yellow decorative squiggle line in background