North Carolina Supreme Court majority moves off the 60,000 vote thing onto several thousand overseas votes, but apparently only in some Democratic counties. Looks like a Bush v. Gore situation that will now go to federal court.
North Carolina Supreme Court majority moves off the 60,000 vote thing onto several thousand overseas votes, but apparently only in some Democratic counties. Looks like a Bush v. Gore situation that will now go to federal court.
I’m so fed up with the NC GOP and Jefferson Griffin. However, framing the case as taking away active military rights to vote should give that 6-3 majority pause.
I think the SCONC is trying to avoid the kind of nationwide stink by keeping the 60,000 voters Griffin challenged but making 5,000 military and overseas voters update their registration is more underhanded to try to get the SCOTUS to rule in Griffin’s favor.
I don’t trust the SCOTUS to do the right thing. But if they do, Griffin will have a target on his back when he runs for re-election to NC Court of Appeals.
I’m really awful at political predictions. If that happens (and Griffin gets smacked down), I’m curious which Trump appointee on SCOTUS will vote to uphold the election results and seat Justice Riggs.
North Carolina Supreme Court issues mixed ruling on election contest: 60k ballots with alleged incomplete registrations will be counted, but 5k military/overseas voters have 30 days to cure ballots. Riggs says she's taking the case to federal court.
What gets me is that if those ballots were indeed really actually invalid, then all the votes on all the other dozens of races on those ballots should also be invalidated. And most every contest in the state be re-tabulated.
Keep in mind that most should be cured. I have to hope NC Dems are or will be contacting people to help get as many as possible cured. Also, not every vote was Democratic. So yes it could, but not necessarily.
(1) The lower court decision as to legitimate votes where people simply had not provided information not required at the time they registered was reversed.
(2) As to military and overseas ballots where something was missing (photo ID) the time to cure is extended from 15 business days to "thirty calendar days after the mailing of notice."
(3) As to people overseas who never lived in NC, (I assume children of NC residents who turned 18 overseas or had never registered), the lower court decision was affirmed and the votes not counted.
Perhaps I missed it on a quick read, but I do not see where the opinion distinguished by county.
What is worse, these targeted voters are only those who happened to have registered in Guilford County, or maybe one of three or four other counties that vote heavily Democratic, the special order is not clear, but in any case, not every such voter in the state. Therefore, as a result of the action taken by this Court in this matter, the vote of an overseas or military voter who is registered in Wake County and who voted pursuant to the laws applicable at the time is counted. However, the vote of an overseas or military voter who is registered in Guilford County is presumed to be fraudulent and will not count unless that voter provides proof of their identity within thirty business days.
According to the Overseas Vote Foundation North Carolina law does (or did?) allow children to "inherit" voting rights from a parent who resided in North Carolina.
Under the logic of Bush v. Gore this is very hard to defend. Unequal treatment of ballots in different counties was a big thing in the ruling.
I expect that only challenging democratic counties and not all voters will cost Griffin int federal court. I could see SCOTUS being okay with all military voters being challenged over voter ID. Don't see 5 votes for allowing military votes being challenged only in dem counties.
Of course the cynical view is that Bush v. Gore wasn't a principled decision at all, just one designed to give a result the Republican majority on the court wanted. But it's much worse to throw out duly counted and recounted votes after the fact than to just prevent a statewide recount on a pretext. If the U.S. Supreme Court were to sustain this decision, democracy of any kind would be over in the U.S.
NC political culture, close elections and partisan election of judges makes it more likely that they try to steal an election.
This wouldn't happen in MI,PA,WI as dem aligned judges are the majority on their supreme courts.
GA and AZ are more of an question mark. Both supreme courts refused to entertain Trump's attempts to steal 2020. Both courts are very conservative but not as partisan as the NC judge.
I have the theory that close partisan elections makes republican judges more likely to behave like politicans looking for every edge to win. Uncompetative judge elections in GA and AZ gets you conservative judges that are not as willing to steal an election. As they personally don't feel the need to rig an election they are easily winning anyway.
North Carolina Supreme Court majority moves off the 60,000 vote thing onto several thousand overseas votes, but apparently only in some Democratic counties. Looks like a Bush v. Gore situation that will now go to federal court.
https://appellate.nccourts.org/orders.php?t=P&court=1&id=449428&pdf=1&a=0&docket=1&dev=1
https://bsky.app/profile/mjsdc.bsky.social/post/3lmkz5udgfc2b
I’m so fed up with the NC GOP and Jefferson Griffin. However, framing the case as taking away active military rights to vote should give that 6-3 majority pause.
I think the SCONC is trying to avoid the kind of nationwide stink by keeping the 60,000 voters Griffin challenged but making 5,000 military and overseas voters update their registration is more underhanded to try to get the SCOTUS to rule in Griffin’s favor.
I don’t trust the SCOTUS to do the right thing. But if they do, Griffin will have a target on his back when he runs for re-election to NC Court of Appeals.
Aren’t military votes protected by federal law?
According to the NC GOP and Jefferson Griffin, if you’re active military who votes for Democrats, your vote doesn’t count.
I mean this is why I don’t see Griffin winning in federal courts.
I’m really awful at political predictions. If that happens (and Griffin gets smacked down), I’m curious which Trump appointee on SCOTUS will vote to uphold the election results and seat Justice Riggs.
Amy Coney Barrett I think will side with Riggs, maybe Kavanaugh as well.
If any of the Trumpsters are reachable, it's Barrett.
North Carolina Supreme Court issues mixed ruling on election contest: 60k ballots with alleged incomplete registrations will be counted, but 5k military/overseas voters have 30 days to cure ballots. Riggs says she's taking the case to federal court.
https://bsky.app/profile/democracydocket.com/post/3lmkyevbqgu2g
What a f'ing hypocritical NC Supreme Court.
What gets me is that if those ballots were indeed really actually invalid, then all the votes on all the other dozens of races on those ballots should also be invalidated. And most every contest in the state be re-tabulated.
So this would flip the election correct if they disallow the 5,000 plus or minus overseas ballots.
Yes it would.
It could, but it’s not guaranteed to. Nobody knows how these people even voted or even if Riggs got her entire MOV from this group.
It could.
Keep in mind that most should be cured. I have to hope NC Dems are or will be contacting people to help get as many as possible cured. Also, not every vote was Democratic. So yes it could, but not necessarily.
As I read it:
(1) The lower court decision as to legitimate votes where people simply had not provided information not required at the time they registered was reversed.
(2) As to military and overseas ballots where something was missing (photo ID) the time to cure is extended from 15 business days to "thirty calendar days after the mailing of notice."
(3) As to people overseas who never lived in NC, (I assume children of NC residents who turned 18 overseas or had never registered), the lower court decision was affirmed and the votes not counted.
Perhaps I missed it on a quick read, but I do not see where the opinion distinguished by county.
From the dissent:
What is worse, these targeted voters are only those who happened to have registered in Guilford County, or maybe one of three or four other counties that vote heavily Democratic, the special order is not clear, but in any case, not every such voter in the state. Therefore, as a result of the action taken by this Court in this matter, the vote of an overseas or military voter who is registered in Wake County and who voted pursuant to the laws applicable at the time is counted. However, the vote of an overseas or military voter who is registered in Guilford County is presumed to be fraudulent and will not count unless that voter provides proof of their identity within thirty business days.
Thanks. I see why you mentioned Bush v. Gore above.
According to the Overseas Vote Foundation North Carolina law does (or did?) allow children to "inherit" voting rights from a parent who resided in North Carolina.
https://www.overseasvotefoundation.org/content/us-citizen-born-abroad-can-i-vote
I'm not sure if the decision overturns that or if the ballots in question are a different scenario.
Under the logic of Bush v. Gore this is very hard to defend. Unequal treatment of ballots in different counties was a big thing in the ruling.
I expect that only challenging democratic counties and not all voters will cost Griffin int federal court. I could see SCOTUS being okay with all military voters being challenged over voter ID. Don't see 5 votes for allowing military votes being challenged only in dem counties.
Of course the cynical view is that Bush v. Gore wasn't a principled decision at all, just one designed to give a result the Republican majority on the court wanted. But it's much worse to throw out duly counted and recounted votes after the fact than to just prevent a statewide recount on a pretext. If the U.S. Supreme Court were to sustain this decision, democracy of any kind would be over in the U.S.
Maybe in North Carolina, but I don’t see how this decision would end democracy in the other swing states where there are more guardrails.
Anyplace where Republicans can annul votes.
The one swing state that could happen in Georgia, where the GOP has a trifecta. But the GAGOP doesn’t seem as extreme on this issue as the NCGOP are.
They wouldn't need a trifecta.
Yes it's the makeup of the state courts. We'd be screwed in AZ too.
Any Republican official could make an argument in Federal courts if the Supreme Court sustains this.
NC political culture, close elections and partisan election of judges makes it more likely that they try to steal an election.
This wouldn't happen in MI,PA,WI as dem aligned judges are the majority on their supreme courts.
GA and AZ are more of an question mark. Both supreme courts refused to entertain Trump's attempts to steal 2020. Both courts are very conservative but not as partisan as the NC judge.
I have the theory that close partisan elections makes republican judges more likely to behave like politicans looking for every edge to win. Uncompetative judge elections in GA and AZ gets you conservative judges that are not as willing to steal an election. As they personally don't feel the need to rig an election they are easily winning anyway.