Bulwark Takes Episode Summary: "NC Justice Allison Riggs Opponent Still Won't Concede — Four Months Later"

Release Date: March 20, 2025

In this compelling episode of Bulwark Takes, host Lauren Egan delves into the unprecedented delay in certifying the North Carolina Supreme Court race from the 2024 elections. Five months after the election, the certification is still pending due to legal challenges led by Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin against Democratic incumbent Allison Riggs. Riggs, a sitting North Carolina Supreme Court Justice, joins the discussion to shed light on the implications of this prolonged uncertainty for democracy and judicial independence.

1. Election Overview and Certification Delay

Lauren Egan opens the episode with a summary of the contentious North Carolina Supreme Court race, highlighting the slim victory margin of Allison Riggs over Jefferson Griffin by approximately 700 votes out of 5.5 million cast. Despite independent recounts confirming Riggs' win, the certification remains stalled due to Griffin's persistent legal challenges aiming to invalidate around 60,000 votes.

Lauren Egan (00:00):
"The state Supreme Court race has not yet been certified, and that's not because we don't know who actually won the race...long story short, the election there hasn't been certified, which is just pretty crazy given that it's five months later."

2. Impact of Vote Challenges on Military and Minority Voters

Allison Riggs provides a detailed account of the demographics targeted by Griffin's challenges. The disputed votes predominantly belong to military personnel and their families, retirees like Riggs' parents who hold military IDs without driver's licenses or Social Security numbers, and individuals voting under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Voting Act. These groups face undue disenfranchisement efforts, with an attempt to invalidate ballots from over 5,500 military members concentrated in four of North Carolina's most Democratic counties.

Allison Riggs (02:56):
"My opponent is trying to disenfranchise my own parents...He's trying to disenfranchise them by attacking their ability to vote because of issues with the voter file."

3. Personal Toll and Legal Battle

Riggs shares the personal impact of the prolonged legal battle, including accruing $1.1 million in legal fees and the strain on her family, particularly her retired military parents who are now wary of their voting rights being suppressed.

Allison Riggs (07:04):
"These are some of the 68,000 voters. They are disproportionately young people, people of color, women. They are heavily military...Integrity of our courts is under attack."

4. Broader Implications for Democracy and Judicial Independence

The conversation shifts to the national implications of this case, with Riggs expressing fear that Griffin's tactics could serve as a blueprint for similar challenges across the country, undermining democratic processes and judicial independence.

Allison Riggs (10:03):
"I'm 100% sure it will be [replicated]. They picked the wrong person to fight this fight with...It's about the voters, not me."

Riggs emphasizes the existential threat posed to democracy when political figures attempt to alter election outcomes post-facto, highlighting the importance of maintaining an independent judiciary that resists such pressures.

5. State and National Reactions

Riggs discusses the mixed reactions within North Carolina, noting that while the Republican Party claims the challenges are about election integrity, many Republicans themselves are opposing Griffin's actions. Over 225 former judges and governmental officials have urged Griffin to cease his efforts, indicating bipartisan concern over the undermining of peaceful power transitions.

Allison Riggs (12:26):
"Republicans are speaking out... There is growing bipartisan agreement on this issue."

6. Long-Term Strategies and Judicial Diversity

Looking ahead, Riggs underscores the necessity of fostering a diverse judiciary to ensure fair representation and trust in the legal system. She advocates for increased support and infrastructure to back diverse candidates, particularly those from underrepresented communities, to run for judicial positions without the burden of insurmountable legal challenges and financial strains.

Allison Riggs (15:39):
"I believe that directly affected people should be at the table when decisions are being made...We are creating an infrastructure to support them."

Riggs also highlights the strategic importance of upcoming elections, such as the Wisconsin Supreme Court races, as battlegrounds for maintaining judicial independence.

7. The Legal Path Forward

Riggs outlines the expected timeline and legal avenues for resolving the certification delay. The case is set to proceed through the North Carolina Court of Appeals, then the State Supreme Court, with potential escalation to the federal courts if necessary. She anticipates the process could extend up to 10 months, underscoring the prolonged uncertainty voters are facing.

Allison Riggs (20:22):
"We're in the four to 10 months still to go...if we have to move to federal court, it could stretch out till the end of this year."

8. Maintaining Judicial Integrity and Public Support

Riggs discusses her decision to recuse herself from the case to maintain judicial integrity and transparency. She emphasizes the importance of standing up for voters' rights and the broader ideological battle for an independent judiciary, encouraging public awareness and support.

Allison Riggs (22:07):
"I will not give an inch on the fundamental rights of the people that I serve."

Conclusion

The episode wraps up with Riggs appealing to listeners to stay informed and engaged, directing them to her social media and campaign website for updates. She reinforces her commitment to defending voting rights and ensuring that democratic processes are respected and upheld.

Allison Riggs (24:10):
"I want people to sign up to get information because this will be rapidly moving."

Key Takeaways:

• The North Carolina Supreme Court race remains uncertified due to legal challenges targeting 60,000 votes.
• Significant efforts to disenfranchise military and minority voters highlight threats to voter integrity.
• Allison Riggs is at the forefront of defending judicial independence, facing substantial legal and financial hurdles.
• The situation in North Carolina could set a national precedent for similar electoral challenges.
• Strengthening judicial diversity and supporting fair election practices are crucial for preserving democracy.

This episode of Bulwark Takes provides an in-depth examination of the ongoing electoral dispute in North Carolina, illustrating the profound implications for voter rights and the integrity of the judiciary. Allison Riggs' steadfast defense against attempts to undermine her election serves as a pivotal case study in the broader fight to maintain democratic principles in the United States.