Category Archives: recounts

Iowa overhauls its recount rules

recounts

As a former Iowa resident who saw the 6-vote margin of decision in Iowa’s Second Congressional District in 2020, I saw that the state’s recount laws could use a face lift. In 2025, the Iowa legislature, after previous fits and starts, has enacted much improved law. Some highlights of HF 928:

  • Election officials will recount ballots, just like they count ballots in the first place, rather than outsource the job to a recount board
  • Recounts occur when the margin is under 0.15%, rather than 1% (a significant improvement in cost and time, without affecting the likelihood of success of recounts)
  • Recounts occur automatically, rather than at the behest of a candidate
  • Recounts occur jurisdiction-wide, rather than in the counties or precincts a candidate chooses (which solves an equal protection problem)
  • Recounts occur by the same mechanism as the count (typically by machine) across the jurisdiction, and hand counts are available only in extremely limited and narrow circumstances (solving another equal protection problem)

It’s not clear why the changes were voted along partisan lines–Democrats, for instance, were defending the recount board instead of election officials recounting ballots, although it’s not clear why Democrats would necessarily support it or Republicans necessarily oppose it–but the changes should be a strong, non-partisan improvement in Iowa elections.

Share this:

In a 4-2 Opinion that Will Disenfranchise Military and Other Voters and Likely Overturn the Results of a Valid Election in Violation of Due Process, North Carolina Supreme Court Allows Griffin Election Contest to Go Forward, in Part

chicanery, election subversion risk, judicial elections, recounts

WRAL:

Republican Judge Jefferson Griffin has won, in part, his effort to throw out thousands of voters’ ballots from the 2024 elections. On Friday the North Carolina Supreme Court rejected some of Griffin’s challenges but kept others alive, paving the way for him to potentially be declared the winner of last year’s race for a seat on the Supreme Court.

The ruling in Griffin’s favor was mostly along party lines: The 4-2 decision saw one of the court’s Republican justices break party ranks, while the rest joined in the majority ruling for Griffin.

Democracy Docket:

North Carolina’s highest court issued a mixed ruling Friday in the ongoing legal saga over the 2024 election between state Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs (D) and her Republican challenger, appeals court judge Jefferson Griffin. 

Per today’s ruling, around 60,000 ballots with incomplete registrations cast in the 2024 state Supreme Court election will be counted. The Court also issued a 30-day cure period for the roughly 5,000 overseas military voters who did not provide proper photo ID when they registered to vote. But the Court greenlit the decision of a lower court to reject around 200 ballots cast by overseas voters who are registered to vote in North Carolina but never resided in the state. Those ballots will not be counted. 

Riggs said in a statement that she will immediately ask the federal courts to intervene in the case.

This is disenfranchising of voters and raises the risk of election subversion. It’s unprecedented, as Republican lawyer Ben Ginsberg explained about the earlier Court of Appeals ruling, and it violates due process rights of voters (and potentially other federally protected rights) by changing the rules after the fact, as Rick Pildes and Justin Levitt explained.

I hope that the federal courts will now correct this due process violation. As Judge Earls wrote in her dissent:

I have no doubt that this special order, upending years of precedent, violating due process, resulting in the discarding of thousands of legitimate votes, and issued with unseemly haste as though quickly ripping the bandage off the deep wound to our democracy will hurt less, marks one of the lowest points of illegitimacy in this I look forward to the day when our Court will return to the rule of law and act to resolve the critical issues implicated in matters such as this with clarity, transparency, and even treatment for all voters and candidates.

Share this:

Breaking: North Carolina Appeals Court, Over Strong Dissent, Sides with Judge Griffin in Election Contest, Gives Some Voters Chance to Cure Failure to Provide Certain Information to Election Officials (That Officials Did Not Demand)

judicial elections, recounts

You can find the 2-1 opinion and dissent at this link. I’m at a meeting so no chance to read this closely right now, but it appears that the majority held that many of the ballots cast by challenged voters failed to comply with North Carolina law (such as by not including information on registration forms like the last four of a social security number or drivers’ license number), but would give 15 days for a cure. This kind of remedy, in an election decided by fewer than 1,000 votes could well lead to both a scramble and an outcome determinative change.

The dissent is lengthy but says early the key point: “Changing the rules by which these lawful voters took part in our electoral process after the election to discard their otherwise valid votes in an attempt to alter the outcome of only one race among many on the ballot is directly counter to law, equity, and the Constitution.” Voters voted under rules set by the election administrators, and to disenfranchise them after the fact violates those voters’ due process rights.

There are a few things that may happen now. There may be an appeal to the state Supreme Court, where with Justice Riggs (who is one of the candidates) recusing herself, this case could lead to a 3-3 split with the appeals court ruling standing.

There also may be a revival of the Fourth Circuit federal case—to me this has remedies of Roe v. Alabama, where a state court appeared to violate due process in changing the rules for a state election after the fact. The state courts may be violating federal law by disenfranchising voters in this way.

If this process does go forward, I don’t have a good sense as to what it would mean for a 15-day scramble to try to un-disenfranchise these voters.

Share this:

“Appeals Court panel wrestles with NC Supreme Court election dispute”

court decisions, recounts

Carolina Journal:

A North Carolina Court of Appeals panel spent more than 90 minutes Friday morning listening to arguments related to state Supreme Court candidate Jefferson Griffin’s challenge of more than 65,000 ballots cast in last fall’s election.

Griffin, an Appeals Court judge, trails Democratic Justice Allison Riggs, an appointed incumbent, by 734 votes out of more than 5.5 million ballots cast in the Nov. 5 election. Recounts have confirmed Riggs’ lead. Yet a Jan. 7 stay issued by Riggs’ state Supreme Court colleagues has blocked the North Carolina State Board of Elections from certifying Riggs as the winner.

Share this:

“A still-unresolved North Carolina court election is back before judges next week”

judicial elections, recounts

AP:

A panel from North Carolina’s intermediate-level appeals court will hear arguments next week about a still-unsettled November election for a seat on the state’s Supreme Court.

The March 21 hearing by three judges on the Court of Appeals was announced Friday, the same day the court rejected a request by incumbent Supreme Court Associate Justice Allison Riggs to have the entire Court of Appeals consider the matter now instead.

After recounts and election protests, the registered Democrat Riggs leads Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin by 734 votes out of more than 5.5 million ballots cast in their race for an eight-year term on the highest court in the ninth-largest state.

While The Associated Press declared over 4,400 winners in the 2024 general election, the North Carolina Supreme Court election is the only race nationally that is still undecided.

Share this:

“Riggs, Griffin spar over proper forum for NC Supreme Court election dispute”

judicial elections, recounts

Carolina Journal:

The two candidates in North Carolina’s recent Supreme Court election disagree about the proper forum for resolving a legal dispute involving the election. Republican Jefferson Griffin argues that the case belongs in state court. Democrat Allison Riggs counters that federal courts should settle the election fight.

Riggs and the North Carolina Democratic Party filed briefs Wednesday evening with the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals. Both made the case for federal review of the election dispute.

The State Board of Elections and left-of-center activist groups working with Democratic operative Marc Elias’ law firm agree with Riggs and the state Democratic Party. They filed briefs after 11 p.m.

The 4th Circuit will hold oral arguments in the case on Jan. 27.

Riggs, the appointed incumbent, leads Griffin, a state appellate judge, by 734 votes out of 5.5 million ballots cast in the November election. Recounts have confirmed Riggs’ lead.

Griffin has been seeking a writ of prohibition from the state Supreme Court to block elections officials from counting more than 60,000 ballots Griffin has labeled “unlawful.”

Share this:

“NC Supreme Court blocks state from certifying Riggs as the winner in high court election”

judicial elections, recounts

News & Observer:

The North Carolina Supreme Court issued an order on Tuesday blocking the state from certifying a winner in the race for a seat on the high court.

Granting the request of Republican Jefferson Griffin, who trails his opponent, Democratic incumbent Allison Riggs, by 734 votes, the court’s Republican majority issued a temporary stay that will prevent the State Board of Elections from certifying Riggs as the winner.

Anita Earls, the only other Democrat on the court alongside Riggs, dissented, writing that “the public interest requires that the court not interfere with the ordinary course of democratic processes as set by statute and the state constitution.”

Riggs recused herself from the case.

The very court which Griffin aims to join will now hear his challenge of over 60,000 ballots cast in the election and potentially decide a winner in the race….

Share this:

“Riggs responds to Griffin’s request to delay certification of the NC Supreme Court election”

judicial elections, recounts

NC Newsline:

Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs asked a federal judge to deny Appeals Court Judge Jefferson Griffin’s request for a preliminary injunction in his election case. 

Riggs, a Democrat, leads Griffin, a Republican, by 734 votes in the race to retain her seat on the state’s highest court.

A quick resolution to the case is in the public interest, Riggs’ brief says. Under state law, Riggs keeps her seat until the election is decided. But there’s a risk that someone, including Griffin, could argue that decisions are being made by an improperly elected official, the brief says. 

“That risk is particularly unacceptable for election protests that seek to disenfranchise thousands of North Carolina voters by changing the rules after the election concludes.”

Griffin wants to throw out more than 60,000 votes he says were cast by people who are ineligible. Most of the ballots he objects to were cast by people he claims did not provide driver’s license or partial Social Security numbers on their voter registration applications. Republican lawyers argue these voters are not legally registered. 

He has also challenged overseas and military voters because they did not submit photo IDs with their ballots, and has challenged overseas voters who have never lived in the state but whose parents were eligible North Carolina voters before they left the country. 

The State Board of Elections has rejected all of Griffin’s protests, but has not yet certified the results. Griffin asked US District Judge Richard Myers II for a preliminary injunction to prevent the Board of Elections from certifying the results, which would mean Riggs’ reelection. 

In the brief opposing the preliminary injection, a lawyer for Riggs wrote that those votes Griffin wants to throw out must be counted….

Share this:

“A North Carolina Supreme Court Candidate’s Bid to Overturn His Loss Is Based on Theory Election Deniers Deemed Extreme”

fraudulent fraud squad, judicial elections, recounts

ProPublica:

Months before voters went to the polls in November, a group of election skeptics based in North Carolina gathered on a call and discussed what actions to take if they doubted any of the results.

One of the ideas they floated: try to get the courts or state election board to throw out hundreds of thousands of ballots cast by voters whose registrations are missing a driver’s license number and the last four digits of a Social Security number.

But that idea was resisted by two activists on the call, including the leader of the North Carolina chapter of the Election Integrity Network. The data was missing not because voters had done something wrong but largely as a result of an administrative error by the state. The leader said the idea was “voter suppression” and “100%” certain to fail in the courts, according to a recording of the July call obtained by ProPublica.

This novel theory is now at the center of a legal challenge by North Carolina appeals court Judge Jefferson Griffin, a Republican who lost a race for a state Supreme Court seat to the Democratic incumbent, Allison Riggs, by just 734 votes and is seeking to have the result overturned.

The state election board dismissed a previous version of the challenge, which is now being considered in federal court. Before the election, a Trump-appointed judge denied an attempt by the Republican National Committee to remove 225,000 voters from the rolls based on the same theory.

The latest case is getting attention statewide and across the country. But it has not yet been reported that members of the group that had helped publicize the idea had cast doubt on its legality….

he theory Griffin is citing originated with a right-wing activist, Carol Snow, who described herself to ProPublica in an email as “a Bona Fide Grade-A Election Denier.” Snow promoted it with the help of the state chapter of the Election Integrity Network, a national group whose leader worked with President Donald Trump in his failed effort to overturn the 2020 election. The network also was behind extensive efforts to prepare to contest a Trump loss this year in other states, as ProPublica has reported, as well as in North Carolina, according to previously unreported recordings and transcripts of meetings of the state chapter.

State election officials have found that missing information on a voter’s registration is not disqualifying because there are numerous valid reasons for the state’s database to lack that those details.

Those reasons include voters registering before state paperwork was updated about a year ago to require that information or using alternate approved documents, such as a utility bill, to verify their identities. What’s more, voters must still prove their identity when casting a ballot — most often with a driver’s license. “There is virtually no chance of voter fraud resulting from a voter not providing her driver’s license or social security number on her voter registration,” attorneys for the state election board wrote in response to the RNC lawsuit….

Share this:

“Republican Appeals Court Judge Griffin asks the NC Supreme Court to throw out votes”

judicial elections, recounts

NC Newsline:

Republican Appeals Court Judge Jefferson Griffin asked the state Supreme Court on Wednesday to do what the state Board of Elections would not — throw out tens of thousands of votes on the belief that canceling them will elevate him to a seat on the same tribunal.

Griffin is seeking to toss more than 60,000 votes in his effort to unseat Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs, the incumbent Democrat. Griffin is losing by 734 votes out of about 5.5 million cast.

The Board of Elections rejected his requests last week, with most of those votes falling along party lines with Democrats in the majority. 

The Board has not yet certified the results, and Griffin wants the Supreme Court to step in before it does. He asks the court to decide before Monday.

Griffin wants to throw out ballots of more than 60,000 voters he claims did not supply a driver’s license number or partial Social Security number on their registration applications. Republican lawyers in the case claim these voters are not legally registered. Many of those voters have been registered and voting for decades.

“Thousands of such ballots were unlawfully cast in the election,” Griffin’s court filing says.  “Judge Griffin anticipates that, if these unlawful ballots are excluded, he will win the election.” 

Earlier this year, a federal judge partially dismissed a Republican National Committee and NC GOP lawsuit based on this argument. Republicans were seeking to purge 225,000 voters from the rolls, or have the court force them to vote provisional ballots. 

In the Board’s written order, general counsel Paul Cox wrote that just because the numbers did not show up in the registration database doesn’t mean that the voter did not supply them. 

Moreover, state law allows voters without these numbers to register, Cox wrote. 

Griffin also wanted the Board to throw out votes by overseas voters who have never lived in North Carolina but whose parents last lived in the state. A state law passed more than a decade ago allows these voters to cast absentee ballots. State courts rejected a Republican Party lawsuit that sought to prevent the state from accepting these ballots.

In the Board’s one unanimous vote against Griffin, it said it would not reject military and civilian overseas ballots because those voters did not include photo ID. The Board’s own rule says those voters do not have to submit photos with their ballots. …

Share this:

“Republican calls for second recount in NC Supreme Court race”

judicial elections, recounts, voter registration

I’ve gotten a few questions about this.  First, there was a request for a machine recount of the by-a-tiny-nose North Carolina Supreme Court election between incumbent Allison Riggs and challenger Jefferson Griffin.  Then there was a request for a recount of samples of ballots, comparing the machine counts for those samples to hand counts.  Then there was a challenge to the validity of more than 60,000 ballots that had been cast.

Leaving aside the merits of any of the claims in the final challenge (there are real questions about the accuracy of the claims in that challenge), the different procedures are all contemplated by state law, as different ways to ensure that the results were right.  The first two recounts are designed to make sure that the ballots were tallied accurately (and so far, it looks like they really, really were, with 110 votes statewide changing on each side, out of 2.8 million votes apiece).  The challenge procedure is designed to make sure that the ballots that were tallied should have been tallied.

In a race this tight, these types of procedures are to be expected.  And so far, what they’re showing is how well the elections process works.

Share this:

North Carolina: “GOP candidate protests the ballots cast by his opponent’s parents in state Supreme Court race”

judicial elections, recounts

WUNC:

The North Carolina State Board of Elections voted unanimously Tuesday to certify the 2024 elections, except for a handful of contests under recount and protest. That includes the race for a seat on the state Supreme Court in which the Republican candidate has challenged the validity of more than 60,000 ballots, including two cast by his opponent’s parents.

Republican Jefferson Griffin, a judge on the North Carolina Court of Appeals trails Justice Allison Riggs, the Democratic incumbent, in the race for Seat 6 on the state Supreme Court. But the margin between them— 625 votes — is close enough under state law to require the recount demanded by Griffin.

Griffin’s campaign has also filed protests across the state, claiming tens of thousands of ballots should be disqualified for a host of reasons. The claims include ballots allegedly cast early by people who subsequently died before Election Day, ballots cast by people who haven’t completed the terms of a felony conviction, and ballots cast by overseas citizens who have not resided in North Carolina but whose parents or legal guardians were eligible North Carolina voters before leaving the United States.

However, the vast majority of ballot protests are aimed at what the Griffin campaign claims are cases of incomplete voter registrations. According to those protests, these ballots should be disqualified because the registration data do not include the voter’s driver’s license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number.

The basis for this protest is the same as one in a lawsuit filed by the North Carolina Republican Party and the Republican National Committee claiming 225,000 voters should be removed from the state’s rolls due to incomplete registration. A Donald Trump-appointed federal district court judge dismissed a main part of that lawsuit in October….

Share this: