NC SUPREME COURT STEPS
INTO RIGGS-GRIFFIN ELECTION
VOTE CONTROVERSY
By Cash Michaels
Contributing writer
The only unresolved election contest in the country, five months after the November 2024 balloting, is here in North Carolina, and it’s aftermath has taken another significant turn.
On Monday, the NC Supreme Court stepped in to temporarily stop an order by a three-judge panel of the NC Court of Appeals that would have compelled over 60,000 North Carolina voters, many of whom are Black, prove their eligibility in the race between incumbent state Supreme Justice Allison Riggs, a Democrat, and NC Appellate Court Judge Jefferson Griffin, a Republican.
The race between Riggs and Griffin was for Justice Riggs’ state Supreme Court seat. After a post-election statewide recount last November, Justice Riggs reportedly won her race by 734 votes out of 5.2 million cast over Judge Griffin. But refusing to accept defeat, Griffin contested Riggs’ victory by challenging over 60,000 votes already counted, alleging that those voters were not eligible to cast ballots because their registrations were invalid with incomplete Social Security or driver’s license numbers.
Both the NC Board of Elections and a Trump-appointed federal judge had already ruled that that information was no longer necessary for valid voter registrations, but that didn’t stop Judge Griffin from pressing his case legally to work his way up to courts that might rule more in his favor.
Judge Griffin is hoping that by eliminating those 60,000 plus votes, he will effectively win the race for the NC Supreme Court, taking Justice Riggs’ seat.
Riggs is one of only two Democrats on the seven-member high court. Her loss would make it difficult for Democrats to regain the majority anytime in the near future.
A three-judge panel of the NC Appellate Court ruled in Griffin’s favor last Friday with a 2-1 decision, with the panel’s two Republican judges - colleagues of Judge Griffin - ruling in his favor.
That panel gave the over 60,000 voters in question 15 days to prove their eligibility or have their votes in the Riggs-Griffin contest thrown out, but the state Supreme Court stepped in Monday to temporarily block the order.
If Judge Griffin is successful in having those over 60,000 votes thrown out, experts say it would be unprecedented in U.S. electoral history. The votes of over 60,000 otherwise qualified voters would be discounted through no fault of their own. By every metric, they followed the rules and qualified, and yet, their votes could be disqualified after they have been cast.
Griffin was able to successfully mount his legal challenges because he acted before Justice Riggs' 734 recount vote victory could be certified by the state Board of Elections.
According to election experts, other races those 60,000+ voters participated in aren't affected because they have been legally settled, certified, and the winners have taken office, so there is no going back regardless of the result of the Riggs-Griffin race, which has not been certified.
And there's another unsettling fact.
According to a January analysis of the challenged 60,000+ votes by the Raleigh News and Observer, “…Black registered voters were twice as likely to have their votes challenged as white voters. Voters aged 18 to 25 were the largest age group among the challenged voters, accounting for about 23% of all protests, despite making up about 12% of the electorate. And while Democrats and unaffiliated voters made up the majority of the challenged voters, the analysis found, about 22% of the challenged ballots were cast by registered Republicans.”
In that same January N&O story, the Raleigh paper added, “ When comparing the challenged voters to the total registered voters of both racial groups, Black voters were twice as likely to have their ballots contested. That difference largely persists regardless of voters’ party affiliation. Many of the challenged voters — about 38% — did not have a race designated on their voter registration. Chris Cooper, a political scientist at Western Carolina University, said this is likely part of a growing trend of voters not filling out optional demographic categories when they register to vote. Bob Hall, a longtime North Carolina government watchdog, noted that the state has been found to have enacted legislation that targeted Black voters in the past. He pointed to the 2016 ruling from the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals which found that North Carolina’s old voter ID law targeted Black voters with “surgical precision.” “Over and over again, in these cases where Republican operatives and candidates and legislators are taking action to get more power — they’re doing it at the expense of Black voters,” Hall said.”
The NC GOP charged that the Democrat-majority state Board of Elections is actually responsible for the controversy by counting votes that should have been thrown out.
“The integrity of the ballot box is the cornerstone of our democracy. Jefferson Griffin’s commitment to this process demonstrates his dedication to upholding the rule of law and protecting the voices of lawful voters,” said State Republican Party Chair Jason Simmons.
The Democratic Party has sued Judge Griffin and the state Republican Party, charging that they are trying to overturn a legally settled election.
On top of this week’s developments, the Associated Press recently reported that Judge Jefferson Griffin was photographed posing in a Confederate soldier’s uniform in front of a Confederate battle flag while a student at UNC- Chapel Hill years ago.
Judge Griffin acknowledged the old Kappa Alpha fraternity photo when it was recently published.
"I attended a college fraternity event that, in hindsight, was inappropriate and does not reflect the person I am today," Griffin said in a statement. "At that time, like many college students, I did not fully grasp such participation's broader historical and social implications. Since then, I have grown, learned, and dedicated myself to values that promote unity, inclusivity, and respect for all people."
Kappa Alpha fraternity was reportedly well known many years ago to be a “lightning rod …for the racist and insensitive actions of some of its members,” published reports say.
-30-
DRAMA AT ST. AUG’S
CONTINUES AS SCHOOL
SUED FOR OVER $18 MIL
By Cash Michaels
Contributing writer
A month after losing its academic accreditation, the drama at St. Augustine’s University (SAU) continues.
The small, private HBCU in Raleigh is now being sued by two tech companies for over $18 million for reportedly failing to pay for contracted services. That’s $18 million in addition to at least $7 million owed the federal government in back taxes, millions more in fees owed to assorted vendors, and probable millions more in pending lawsuits from former employees if the school loses in litigation.
SAU officials did indicate that the school had secured a $70 million land lease loan with a Florida developer, but that deal ran into trouble with the state attorney general’s office, which was required to approve the terms because SAU is a nonprofit institution. Not much has been revealed since about the status of that deal.
To add to the SAU drama, the embattled school is preparing to graduate the Class of 2025 next month, thanks to a temporary appeals accreditation period it has while fighting the March decision by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC).
But after its upcoming May commencement, not much is known about just how long SAU can, or will remain open for another school year. Last August, SAU had an enrollment of only 200 students, down considerably from a normal enrollment in years prior of at least 1,600 students per semester.
Filed a week apart, the two recent lawsuits accuse SAU of failure to pay for services rendered by two companies.
One company, SBA Connect, claims that SAU went into default on its agreement to provide wireless service last September 2024. One of SBA Connect’s options to settle its outstanding debt is for SAU to pay $16, 860, 597.50 plus interest.
The second company to file litigation against SAU, Avaria, maintains that the school has paid some of the debt it owes the IT firm. According to Avaria’s lawsuit, SAU still owes $448, 067 in overdue bills since 2020, and $884,520 for the balance of its contract.
Reportedly, Avaria is still providing IT services to SAU, despite the litigation.
-30-
ONGOING WAR AGAINST DEI
CONTINUES AS BERGER FILES
BILL BANNING IT AT NC COLLEGES
By CashMichaels
Contributing writer
Powerful Republican Senate Majority leader Phil Berger has now added his legislation to the growing opposition to DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) policies and practices. And if his bill passes, not only is DEI outlawed on public college campuses, but racial and gender bias complaints would also be prohibited.
On March 26th, Sen. Berger (R-Rockingham) filed Senate Bill 558, titled “Eliminating “DEI” in Public Higher Education.”
“An act to demonstrate the General Assembly’s intent that students, professors, administrators, and other employees of public institutions of higher education recognize the equality and rights of all persons and to prohibit public institutions of higher education from promoting certain concepts that are contrary to the intent,” SB 558’s description reads.
DEI was once used by colleges and companies in the aftermath of the 2020 police murder of George Floyd as a way to ensure that qualified Blacks and other people of color were given equal opportunity to compete for educational and employment opportunities. However in May 2024, the conservative majority of U.S. Supreme Court deemed the practice unconstitutional in higher education.
Republicans in North Carolina have since labeled DEI a “divisive concept.” A bill pending in the state House even makes it a criminal offensive for public money to be used to promote DEI policies and practices.
The Rockingham County Republican makes clear in SB 558’s language that it was inspired by Pres. Donald Trump’s January 21st, 2025 executive order banning DEI “…to ensure that higher education recipients of federal funds comply with all applicable laws prohibiting illegal discrimination and comply with the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard …”
Because in the last fiscal year, North Carolina’s public colleges and universities received $2.4 billion in federal aid, and it’s therefore the NC General Assembly’s job to “protect the practice of higher education…,” SB 558 mandates that the UNC Board of Governors adopt a policy not only banning DEI policies and practices, but also “…prohibiting (public colleges) from establishing, maintaining or otherwise implementing a group or committee designed to investigate a bias incident.”
Bias incident in the bill is defined as “…any conduct, speech, or expression…” that the college, group or committee labels as “…intimidating, demeaning, mocking, degrading, or marginalizing an individual or group based on the perceived or actual identity of that individual or group.”
Each public college or university will be required to certify annually in writing by September 1st to the UNC Board of Governors that they are in compliance with the law, if passed.
SB 558’s language adds, “ For the certification due September 1, 2025, …..each public institution of higher education shall also include information on the initial implementation of this act, including reductions in force and spending, changes to jib titles and position descriptions, and how savings achieved from these actions have been directed.”
Critics of the measure warn that as written, SB 558 is overly broad and does not really define DEI. Those critics add that the bill would chill free and open discussion on North Carolina college campuses.
The bill becomes law upon passage.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment