Justice Allison Griffin Responds to Court Certification Ruling

Summary

The MeidasTouch Podcast: Justice Allison Riggs Responds to Court Certification Ruling

Episode Overview In this gripping episode of The MeidasTouch Podcast, hosts Ben, Brett, and Jordy Meiselas delve into the recent monumental legal developments surrounding the North Carolina Supreme Court race. The episode features a candid and in-depth conversation with Justice Allison Riggs, who provides her perspective on the federal court's decision to certify her election victory over her MAGA Republican opponent, Jefferson Griffin. This summary encapsulates the key discussions, insights, and conclusions drawn from the episode, complete with notable quotes and timestamps for reference.

---

1. Introduction to the Legal Battle (00:30)

Ben kickstarts the episode by outlining the dramatic turn of events in North Carolina's Supreme Court race. He explains how Jefferson Griffin, the MAGA Republican candidate, refused to concede after multiple recounts favored Democratic Justice Allison Riggs. Griffin's persistent challenges to the vote counts led to a protracted six-month legal ordeal that traversed through various levels of the state's judicial system.

Key Points:

• Election Disputes: Griffin contested the legitimacy of the votes, alleging disenfranchisement and vote theft.
• Judicial Journey: The dispute ascended from lower courts to the North Carolina Supreme Court, which mandated a recount of specific vote subsets deemed inconsistent with voters' intentions.

---

2. Federal Court Ruling and Judge Myers' Decision (02:15)

Ben details the pivotal federal court ruling that ultimately favored Justice Riggs. Presided over by Judge Richard Myers, a Trump-appointed judge in North Carolina, the decision mandated the certification of Riggs' narrow 734-vote victory and dismissed Griffin's election protest. Despite the Trump-appointed status of the judge, Myers emphasized adherence to the law over political affiliations.

Notable Quote:

“This consolidated action concerns an attempt to change the rules of the game after it had been played....” – Judge Richard Myers [02:45]

Key Points:

• Certification Order: Formal acknowledgment of Riggs' win by the North Carolina State Board of Elections.
• Dismissal of Protest: Rejection of Griffin's efforts to overturn the certified results.
• Temporary Stay: The order was stayed for one week to allow Griffin an opportunity to appeal.

---

3. Justice Allison Riggs' Perspective (04:22)

Justice Allison Riggs joins the conversation to discuss the significance of the federal court's ruling. She underscores the broader implications for democracy, emphasizing that electoral integrity must be preserved against attempts to undermine it through selective ballot challenges.

Notable Quote:

“We knew that democracy cannot exist in those conditions.” – Justice Allison Riggs [04:30]

Key Points:

• Victory for Voters: The ruling is portrayed as a triumph not just for North Carolina voters but for democratic principles nationwide.
• Fight Against Voter Suppression: Riggs highlights the existential threat posed by attempts to selectively invalidate votes.

---

4. Breakdown of the Vote Challenges (05:46)

Ben seeks clarification on the nature of the 65,000 votes contested by Griffin. Justice Riggs elucidates that the majority of these challenges targeted absentee ballots cast by military and overseas voters, particularly those missing non-mandatory information like Social Security numbers or driver's licenses.

Key Points:

• Categories of Challenged Votes:
  • 60,000 Voters: Allegedly missing information not required under federal law.
  • 5,500 Military and Overseas Voters: Utilized the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Voting Act to vote from abroad.
• Selective Targeting: Griffin focused these challenges exclusively on Democratic strongholds, ignoring other races and counties.

---

5. Implications for National Voting Rights (10:00)

Ben introduces the concept of "laboratories of autocracy," suggesting that North Carolina’s case could set a precedent for broader voter suppression tactics across the United States. He emphasizes the potential for these strategies to be replicated in other states, posing a threat to the integrity of future elections.

Key Points:

• Precedent Setting: The ruling may embolden similar challenges in other states, undermining voter trust.
• National Implications: The fight in North Carolina is framed as part of a larger battle to protect democratic processes nationwide.

---

6. Personal Impact: The Riggs Family Story (10:55)

To humanize the legal and political stakes, the podcast features a poignant video of Justice Riggs' parents reacting to their ballots being challenged. Their long history of voting is juxtaposed with the unexpected and distressing experience of having their votes scrutinized despite their adherence to voting protocols.

Notable Quote:

“This does not feel like election integrity personally. This feels like voter suppression...” – Justice Riggs’ Parent [11:06]

Key Points:

• Family Legacy: Riggs' parents have a combined voting history of over a century.
• Emotional Toll: The challenge to their votes underscores the personal nature of voter suppression efforts.

---

7. Future Steps and Continuing the Fight (12:32)

In the concluding segments, Justice Riggs expresses her commitment to upholding voters' rights and safeguarding democracy. She vows to continue legal battles if necessary, ensuring that electoral integrity remains intact and that the power remains with the electorate rather than being manipulated by political entities.

Notable Quote:

“We need people, voters to decide elections, not politicians and not courts.” – Justice Allison Riggs [12:45]

Key Points:

• Ongoing Vigilance: Riggs emphasizes that the fight to protect voting rights is far from over.
• Democratic Assurance: A reaffirmation of dedication to keeping democratic processes free from undue influence.

---

Conclusion

This episode of The MeidasTouch Podcast provides a comprehensive overview of the intense legal struggle surrounding the North Carolina Supreme Court race. Through articulate discussions and firsthand accounts, Justice Allison Riggs articulates the broader implications of the federal court's ruling, highlighting the continuous need to defend democratic integrity against selective voter suppression tactics. The podcast not only informs listeners about the specific case but also frames it within the larger context of national voting rights and the ongoing battle to preserve democracy in the United States.

---

Notable Moments and Timestamps:

• Judge Myers' Ruling: [02:45]
• Justice Riggs on Democracy: [04:30]
• Riggs’ Family's Voting Experience: [10:55] - [11:42]
• Future of Voting Rights: [12:45]

---

Join the Conversation For listeners interested in following the latest developments and engaging with the MeidasMighty community, new episodes are released every Tuesday and Friday morning, with live video sessions on Mondays and Thursdays at 8 PM ET/5 PM PT on the MeidasTouch YouTube channel.

Transcript

[Ben]

This episode is brought to you by Lifelock. Not everyone is careful with your personal information, which might explain why there's a victim of identity theft every five seconds in the U.S. fortunately, there's LifeLock. LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats to your identity. If your identity is stolen, a US based restoration specialist will fix it, guaranteed or your money back. Save up to 40% your first year by visiting lifelock.com podcast terms apply.

We've got major news out of North Carolina folks. Where the Supreme Court race back from November was thrown into turmoil. Where the MAGA Republican candidate for the Supreme Court seat Jefferson Griffin refused to concede after losing in multiple recounts to Justice Allison Riggs who was on the Supreme Court. The Democratic back candidate Justice Allison Riggs. At every step the MAGA Republican candidate Jefferson and Griffin tried to challenge existing votes that were already counted. He tried to disenfranchise people. He tried to literally steal votes from people. This had been a six month ordeal where the votes of the people were just not being counted. It went through the state court system from the lower level court to their court of Appeals to the Supreme Court where ultimately a subset of votes was ordered by the United by the North Carolina Supreme Court to be recounted through this process which was counter to what the will of the people were who actually voted. So after the Supreme Court in North Carolina made that ruling separately, Justice Allison Riggs was bringing an action in federal court and we just got a very important federal court ruling in this entire saga from of all people a Trump appointed judge in North Carolina, a judge by the name of Judge Richard Myers. And he got to hand it to the guy. He followed the law, he put Politics aside and U.S. district Court Judge Richard Myers ordered the North Carolina State Board of Elections to certify a 734 vote win for the Democratic Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs and rejected all of the MAGA candidate Jefferson Griffin's election protest. The judge did stay the order for one week so that Jefferson Griffin may appeal. And knowing Jefferson Griffin, I'm sure he's going to do what Jefferson Griffin does. But when you take a look at this order by the District Court judge again a Trump appointed judge and I don't even like saying Trump appointed judge Obama appointed judge, but I think it is still a notable factor here. Here's what the judge wrote. This consolidated action concerns an attempt to to change the rules of the game after it had been played. The court cannot countenance that strategy permitting parties to upend the set rules of an election after the election has taken place can only produce confusion and turmoil, which threatens to undermine public confidence in federal courts, state agencies and end elections themselves. Accordingly, the court finds as follows. 1, Retroactive invalidation of absentee ballots cast by overseas military and civilian voters violates those voters substantive due process rights. That's one of the things Jefferson Griffin wanted to happen. The cure process violates equal protection rights of overseas military and civilian voters. And three, the lack of any notice or opportunity for eligible voters to contest their mistaken designation as never residence violates procedural due process and represents an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote. Therefore, the judge ordered that the win for Justice Allison Riggs be certified. Let's bring in Justice Allison Riggs to respond to this ruling. Where are we at? Where do we go from here? It's great to have you on and we've been having you on now for a few months following this entire saga with you. So, you know, here we are May 6th. The order dropped May 5th.

[Justice Allison Riggs]

Yeah, thanks so much for having me, Ben. Six months to the day after election day, after North Carolina voters spoke, a federal district court judge issued what was an enormous victory, not just for North Carolina voters, but for voters all across the country. This has been a tough six months, but I'm no stranger to tough fights. And we knew all along that the threat here was existential, that if people with power can toss out ballots selectively after an election, cancel the votes of people they, they think don't didn't vote for them, that democracy cannot exist in those conditions. And so we have been fighting tooth and nail in a courtroom, not just for North Carolina service members, that that was a worthy enough fight. For sure, North Carolina service members deserve to have someone standing up to defend them the way they defend us. But we knew that this would open the door to, to enormous mischief and frivolous challenges after election day across the country. So we're very gratified by the ruling and stand ready to continue the fight if need be. But really this, this should, should have decisively ended it yesterday.

[Ben]

Can you remind our viewers what these 65,000 votes were that were being challenged? I know there was one group of 60, then there was another 5,000 that were the military overseas. And, and maybe you can describe also what Jefferson Griffin and the Republicans were doing to like specifically one just target your race, not the other races, not the Trump race, not the other congressional races. Those were apparently fine. And then they micro targeted Democratic areas only to try to change the vote after the fact. Can you go into that yeah.

[Justice Allison Riggs]

So the legal terminology for what this was is throwing spaghetti at the wall. My opponent decided to challenge reached as high as 68,000 eligible North Carolinians who cast lawful ballots. The biggest bucket, 60,000 of them, were voters who were alleged to have information missing from their voter file, including a Social Security number or a driver's license number. But that information is not required under federal law. Federal law actually provides that those voters can vote if they Show a certain ID. My parents were in that bucket of 60,000. My dad is 30 years retired military. He and my mom retired down to North Carolina to be near to me and my sister. They went to register in person using their military IDs. Retired military IDs, which don't have driver's license or Social Security numbers on it. The Department of Defense decided years ago not to put Social Security Security numbers on military id. So my parents followed every, every rule, did everything right, as did the rest of the 60,000 voters in that bucket. Over the course of the last six months, we were able to knock out that challenge. Even the North Carolina Supreme Court said those voters did nothing wrong and we won't disenfranchise them. What has persisted has been the selective targeting of voters who use a federal mechanism to vote. It's called the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Voting Act. It's a federal law designed to address how hard it is for military members and their family to vote when they are serving away from home or overseas. Upwards of 5,500 of those voters in four counties only were challenged. So these are people who used a specific, identifiable kind of voting because they were service members, members, or working overseas for certain reasons. My opponent, there's 100 counties in North Carolina, he picked four of the most Democratic counties and challenged the military and overseas voters in those four counties only, and said they should be challenged in other, more red counties. No problem. And mine was the only race uncertified from the 2024 election cycle. It still is. But no complaints about Donald Trump winning North Carolina in the presidential race. A number of Democrats and Republicans won up and down the ballot. North Carolina is a very purple state, but this was really troubling, inconsistent, challenging. And it really is reminiscent of the arguments in Bush v. Gore, where in the 2000 election, the question was, well, do we do something in a handful of Florida counties that we're not doing in other counties? And subjecting military voters to the presumption that their vote is invalid unless they jump through hurdles, even when they may be serving on a submarine underseas in the Atlantic Ocean, that that is unconstitutional. And we were gratified that the federal court yesterday upheld every one of the arguments we made about why these challenges violated the federal Constitution.

[Ben]

We've talked about this concept of the laboratories of autocracy, how sometimes you're seeing these MAGA Republicans try out these playbooks in states and say, okay, well, we can do voter suppression here. We could gerrymander here. And now, even if we lose the election after doing all of those things, we can basically just kind of redo it. We can target certain areas, throw out 65,000 votes. And it's why I think, you know, to your point, this has national implications here. If this stands, they then kind of roll this out, this test balloon everywhere else, kind of. I just want to show the video of. Want to show the video of your parents, because I think it brings it home when they're both like, if you add our ages up together, we've been voting for like 100 years. Of course we're going to vote for our daughter. What are you talking. You're throwing out our votes for our daughter. What do you mean? Here, just watch this video. This is for our viewers.

[Justice Allison Riggs]

Yeah, well, we were thoroughly shocked to find out there even was a list. And then to find out that we were on the list when we have voted successfully for 50 years without an issue.

[Justice Allison Riggs' Parent]

And combined we have voted religiously for over. Over a hundred years, the two of us together. And this is the first time the ballots ever been challenged. And. And I know that my daughter had spoken a lot about recognizing voter suppression when she sees it. I can tell you this does not feel like election integrity personally. This feels like voter suppression when it intends involves us and a very important election to us personally. It involves our daughter.

[Ben]

Well, I'll tell you, Justice Riggs, so my parents were very proud when I graduated Georgetown Law. They were a little bit curious when I became a podcaster. But I got them back on my team now and they're proud again. But I can only imagine you got proud parents. You're a Supreme Court justice in the state of North Carolina. They go out to vote for you in the election, and then they find out that. And they're going to be so careful. How could you be more careful than the parents voted for them? I bet you they looked at it, they took photos of it, they mounted it on the wall. I bet you it was one and their vote was one that was initially going to be thrown out. So if it happened to them, just imagine what's happening overseas and everybody else. So I'll let you address that. But just as we wrap up, where do we go from here? What happens next?

[Justice Allison Riggs]

Yeah, I mean, I have always represented voters in fights to make sure that their right to vote counted. I was a civil rights and voting rights attorney before joining the bench. And my parents experience only reminded me of what I already knew, that there are real people at the other end of these attempts to put political, personal political ambition over the rule of law and the Constitution. I put my hand on a Bible two years ago, raised my hand and swore an oath to uphold the federal and state constitutions. And it's been my honor to fight for North Carolina voters. It's been my honor to make sure that democracy carries the day across the country and that nothing I stood hand in hand with voters in North Carolina who said democracy is not going to die here in North Carolina, not on our watch. And I hope this fight is over. But if it's not, we'll keep fighting. We need people, voters to decide elections, not politicians and not courts. And it's a good day here in North Carolina. But we will not let our guard down. We will never, ever give up in fighting to keep hands, keep power in the hands of the people.

[Ben]

North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs right off the big decision by the district court in North Carolina. Great to have you on.

[Justice Allison Riggs]

Thank you so much everybody.

[Ben]

Hit subscribe let's get to 5 million subscribers. Can't get enough Midas? Check out the Midas plus substack for ad. Free articles, reports, podcasts, daily recaps from Ron Filipkowski and more. Sign up for free [e-mail].