WHQR's Sunday Edition is a free weekly newsletter delivered every Sunday morning. You can sign up for Sunday Edition here and find past editions here.
The Griffin List
On Friday, a three-judge panel on the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to allow Republican Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin to challenge the eligibility of tens of thousands of voters. The ruling moves him closer to overturning Democratic incumbent Supreme Court Judge Allison Riggs’ 734-vote lead for a seat on the state Supreme Court (the last undecided race of 2024).
The Democratic judge sided with Riggs. The two Republican judges ruled in favor of Griffin, their colleague on the court.
WFAE’s Steve Harrison had a good write-up on the ruling here (you can find his report in our States News section and on our Facebook page)
The ruling throws out 270 votes, and gives around 66,000 voters 15 days to ‘cure’ their voter registration, a tight window that will put significant pressure on local election offices and volunteers. Many have asked, if a significant number of votes are ultimately rejected, could that impact other races (for example, close races here in New Hanover County)? The short answer is that traditionally state elections officials and the courts have treated races that are certified as final, but no one can guarantee what future courts might do — an ambiguity, however slight, that's left many unsettled.
Note: You can check to see if you’re on the list. The Triangle Blog Blog (yes, with two 'Blogs,' their tagline is ‘silly name, smart ideas’) compiled a list here, and the Raleigh News & Observer has an explainer on how to search your name here. (And if you're having trouble sorting it out, drop us a line.)
The ruling is the latest in Griffin’s quest to have Rigg’s victory thrown out. I won’t recapitulate here all of the criticisms of Griffin’s legal battles, except to say they are many — and not limited to Democrats (who feel strongly the Republican appellate judges ruled based on party and not jurisprudence). Even Senate Majority Leader Phil Berger, the state’s most powerful Republican, cast some shade on Griffin’s efforts to disenfranchise voters.
Challenging election results isn’t inherently problematic and, historically, I’ve seen plenty of Democrats and Republicans ask for recounts — sometimes repeatedly, culminating in extensive, laborious, county-wide hand-to-eye ballot counts. Candidates on both sides of the aisle have said that they’re exercising their full rights within the election system to ensure they get a fair count. As a journalist — and a voter — I support that. Democracy is worth getting right; if it takes a few weeks to get a final count, I’m okay with that. I think most people are. Griffin requested two recounts, to which he was legally entitled, and again, I think most people would support that.
But this race now feels different. After three counts found him to be the loser, Griffin sued; five months after the election, the state’s second-highest court has essentially overturned the state elections board’s determination that most of these voters legally registered when they cast their ballots.
The main concern I've heard is that if Griffin is successful, and maybe even if he's not, the case will provide a blueprint for future candidates to take legal action after the fact if they don't like the outcome of an election (and subsequent recounts).
Republicans have every right to want Griffin on the state’s highest court, and this is a fairly close race, so it may not feel like a stretch to file suit. But you don’t have to be a Democrat (and I’m not) to be concerned about reducing an election to a prelude for litigation. I know many Republicans who would be deeply uncomfortable about this situation if the roles and parties were reversed, and many people, regardless of party affiliation, who are thinking past this race to the future.
For now, it appears the onus will fall on local elections boards to track down hundreds (or thousands) of voters and notify them that they need to ‘correct’ their registration — a task for which they are likely not prepared or resourced to complete (since part-time election staff aren’t on hand right now, months after the election elsewhere concluded).
As I understand it, as with more traditional registration questions, local political parties will have to help. But even a few hundred voters can take a local GOP or Democratic party the better part of two weeks to reach. For Jonathan Barfield’s recent near loss in the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners race, local Dems had to track down somewhere around 200 people. For the Griffin v. Riggs case, it’s around 1,700 in New Hanover County. While there are no doubt unaffiliated and Republican voters among the 66,000 some people whose ballots are being challenged, the list does skew Democratic (which is the reason for the challenge), which means it will not be an equal burden on both parties.
Friday’s ruling is already facing an appeal by Democrats, although if the state’s Supreme Court agrees to take the case, few are optimistic about how the 5-1 Republican majority (with Riggs recusing) will vote. Even a 3-3 split would allow the appellate decision to stand. After that, many I’ve spoken with expect the case to go (back) to federal court.
Still, officials don’t recommend waiting — and it could be a long wait — for the legal process to grind its way through to a conclusion. In a statement from the state board, officials suggest seeing if you’re on the list, and proactively checking your info if you think anything might be missing from your registration:
Regardless of the ultimate outcome of this ongoing legal dispute, any voter who is concerned that their voter registration information is incomplete or is not up to date should submit an updated voter registration form.
Submitting an updated voter registration form is easy. Any voter who has a license from the DMV can go to payments.ncdot.gov to fill out a voter registration application. If you’re already registered, submitting this information will merely update your existing voter registration.
You don’t need to create a special account with the DMV. You can select “Continue as Guest” on the DMV’s website and proceed directly to submitting your voter registration.
If you don’t have a license from the DMV, you can download a voter registration form at ncsbe.gov/registering, and then print, sign, and submit that paper form to your county board of elections. Contact and address information for the 100 county boards of elections is available here: https://vt.ncsbe.gov/BOEInfo/.
Letters to the Editor
We welcome letters to the editor’s desk on any topic. Our ideal length is around 400 words or less, but if they need to be a little longer, that’s fine. We reserve the right to edit or add context when necessary. We ask that submissions come with your name and where you live (no street address necessary, just your neighborhood, town, city, etc.). Criticisms are welcome, but we ask you to try to keep it civil.
Send your letter to BSchachtman@whqr.org — or by mail, if you're old school, to WHQR Public Media 254 N. Front Street, Suite 300, Wilmington, NC 28401.
This edition’s letter comes from Elena Rosemond, Chair of the LGBTQ Center of the Cape Fear Coast, based in Wilmington:
The LGBTQ Center of the Cape Fear Coast stands firmly against North Carolina Senate Bill 516, a dangerous and discriminatory piece of legislation that seeks to restrict access to public spaces for transgender individuals. This revived “bathroom bill”, which claims to be in defense of women’s safety, will end up harming and endangering both the women it claims to protect and the transgender community at large.
By advancing SB 516, lawmakers are sending a harmful message to transgender individuals and their families: that their identities are not valid and that they do not deserve access to the same social safety as their cisgender neighbors. We will not stand by while our community is attacked. We will continue to fight for the rights, safety, and dignity of this vulnerable community across North Carolina and beyond.
To our transgender community: You are loved. You are seen. You are not alone. We will not stop advocating for your rights and your future.
We urge North Carolina lawmakers to reject this harmful bill and instead focus on policies that uplift and protect all people, including transgender North Carolinians. We call on allies, advocates, and supporters to speak out, take action, and stand with us in defense of transgender rights.
For more information about our work or ways to get involved, please visit lgbtqcapefear.org.
***
Last week, two Republican state senators filed a sweeping bill, that would restrict trans people’s rights to use the bathrooms of their choice and to update legal documents to reflect their gender identity (under current law, trans people can update the gender on birth certificates and driver's licenses).
My colleague Nikolai Mather sat down with the News & Observer’s Kyle Ingram to work through the details. Notably, the bill shares some features with the infamous 2016 HB2 “bathroom bill.”
That legislation drew criticism for attacking trans rights and the implication that trans people were somehow inherently dangerous — and conversely ignored that crimes like assault and sexual battery were obviously already illegal, irrespective of which bathroom an offender was in or how they identified. Many standup comedians have since riffed darkly on the absurd premise of a violent, predatory male rapist who would be willing to put on a female disguise, go into the women’s room, and assault young girls — only to be thwarted by HB2.
Many who opposed the legislation shied away from defending (or even discussing) trans people directly, either for personal or political reasons. But the bill’s disastrous economic consequences supported a broader consensus among critics.
Even then-candidate Donald Trump offered some moderate criticism of the bill, noting the economic fallout and saying, “Leave it the way it is. There have been very few complaints the way it is. People go. They use the bathroom they feel is appropriate. There has been so little trouble." Trump also added that it should remain a local issue, and that the “federal government should not be involved.”
Flash forward to 2025, and obviously, things have changed, and not just with respect to bathroom bills. As Ingram noted, SB 516 revives the bathroom restrictions but also more directly attacks trans people’s ability to exist as a matter of government record.
It’s a fundamental shift, made more politically tenable as the Overton window is pulled to the right, from balancing the rights of trans people and the comfort of the general public — to legislating whether trans people can legally exist at all. Just a few years ago the GOP party line was fairly libertarian — do what you please in your own home, just don’t push it on us, and don’t indoctrinate our children — but now, there’s a more aggressive tone, not just on the party’s right flank but in the White House.
One has to imagine that four-term state senator and North Carolina native Vickie Sawyer, who cosponsored SB 516, knows the back story of HB2 — and would have some talking points ready after filing it. But apparently not. Sawyer told reporters she was “not prepared” to discuss the bill.
