RALEIGH, N.C. — North Carolina’s Board of Elections on Wednesday rejected formal protests from several Republican candidates who narrowly trailed in their races last month and had questioned more than 60,000 ballots cast.
The decisions of the State Board of Elections sided with Democratic candidates, including those for a seat on the state Supreme Court and a key seat in the General Assembly. It is expected that these issues will now be resolved in court.
The board voted to deny the protests of GOP Supreme Court nominee Jefferson Griffin following a recent statewide machine recount followed Associate Justice Allison Riggs with 734 votes out of more than 5.5 million votes cast. No further recounts were ordered after that a partial recount was completed Tuesday did not suggest that Griffin could overtake Riggs.
Riggs is one of only two Democrats on the seven-member court, which has been a partisan flashpoint in the state for the past two years in lawsuits involving redistricting, photo voter identification and other voting rights.
The board on Wednesday considered protests filed by Griffin, a current Court of Appeals judge, and three General Assembly candidates, covering three voting categories.
These categories include votes cast by people with voter registration without a driver’s license or with partial Social Security numbers; foreign voters who have never lived in the U.S. but whose parents were considered residents of North Carolina; and military or overseas voters who did not provide a copy of their photo ID with their ballot.
The board consists of three Democrats and two Republicans. In three of the four dismissal motions Wednesday, the votes were 3-2 along party lines. The vote on the other motion was unanimous.
Riggs’ campaign has said she is the winner and that Griffin should concede immediately.
After the hearing, Riggs said her parents were among the more than 60,000 voters whose votes were challenged, and “I can personally confirm that they are in fact legal votes.”
Griffin did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment on the decisions. Republican Party Chairman Jason Simmons said in a news release that “the administration’s continued efforts to secure political outcomes for Democrats are shameful” and suggested an appeal could be filed.
Another would-be demonstrator is Republican Rep. Frank Sossamon, who trailed Democratic challenger Bryan Cohn. A Cohn victory would leave Republicans one seat short of maintaining their current veto-proof majority for the next two-year General Assembly that begins next month.
The board ultimately could have ordered corrected ballots, more recounts or new elections if it had determined that the evidence showed that election law violations or irregularities would cast doubt on the results of the protested election.
Dozens of protests filed by Griffin and the legislative candidates are still being considered by county boards.
During Wednesday’s hearing, attorneys for Riggs and other Democrats urged the state board to reject the protests. They view the protests as an illegal attempt to change election rules after votes have been cast and counted, which violates protest rules.
“The voters who are challenging the protesters here today are undoubtedly eligible voters,” said Will Robertson, an attorney representing three Democratic House candidates and the state Democratic Party. “These protests are not only invalid on their face, but they are an affront to democracy and the rule of law in North Carolina.”
Citing the state constitution, Griffin’s attorneys argued that election boards cannot count the ballots of people who have never lived in North Carolina. And they said the state board made a mistake by generating voter registration forms that did not make clear that state law requires an applicant to provide one of the identification numbers.
“We filed these protests because we believe the winners of this election should be determined by eligible voters and only eligible voters,” Craig Schauer, an attorney for Griffin and Republican House candidates, told the board.
In addition to the content of the protests, Democratic board members also threw out the protests because they determined that voters had not received appropriate legal notice that their vote was being challenged.
Griffin sent postcards to a voter or the “current resident” stating that “your vote may be affected” by a protest, according to legal briefs and evidence. It included a QR code that mobile phone users could visit to obtain information. Democrats said people may have thrown away the postcard or viewed it as a scam.
The state council’s decisions came days after the state Democratic Party sued in federal court to prevent the State Board of Elections from deciding in any way to discard the disputed ballots.
Griffin led Riggs by about 10,000 votes on election night, but that lead became smaller and passed to Riggs when qualifying provisional and absentee ballots were added to the totals.