US Appeals Court suspends North Carolina ballot curing procedures in a hotly contested Supreme Court race, throwing the election process into uncertainty.
At a Glance
- A federal appeals court issued a 2-1 ruling blocking North Carolina election officials from contacting voters with disputed ballots
- The ruling specifically affects military and overseas voters who would have had 30 days to fix ballot errors
- The case centers on Associate Justice Allison Riggs’s race against Republican Jefferson Griffin, who filed motions to discard ballots
- Over 1,400 military and overseas ballots from Guilford County could be affected by this decision
- This ruling is part of ongoing litigation over voter identification requirements dating back to 2004
Court Blocks Ballot Correction Process
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit delivered a significant blow to ballot curing efforts in North Carolina on April 22. In a 2-1 decision, the court temporarily blocked state election officials from contacting voters whose ballots have been disputed in the 2024 state Supreme Court race. This ruling specifically halts the process of mailing notices to overseas and military voters that would allow them to correct errors on their absentee ballots.
The decision came in response to an emergency request from Associate state Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs, who sought to overturn previous state appellate court rulings. This legal maneuver effectively reverses an earlier order by U.S. District Judge Richard Myers II, who had denied Republican opponent Jefferson Griffin’s request for a stay on the ballot curing process.
Griffin had filed motions to discard ballots he claims were cast in violation of state law. The ruling temporarily stops a process that state judges had mandated to address potentially ineligible voters, creating uncertainty in the contested Supreme Court race. According to the North Carolina State Board of Elections, approximately 1,409 ballots from military and overseas voters in Guilford County could be affected by this decision.
BREAKING: In a win for voters, federal appeals court blocks North Carolina from beginning ballot curing as part of Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin’s effort to overturn the results of the state’s 2024 Supreme Court race. https://t.co/mS6Sj0pnpj
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 22, 2025
Background on Voter Verification Dispute
This latest ruling is part of a much larger dispute over voter verification in North Carolina. The state Supreme Court had previously ordered the counting of over 60,000 votes from individuals who registered since 2004 but lacked complete identification records. The high court specifically criticized the State Board of Elections for failing to ensure voters provided necessary identification numbers during the registration process.
In its ruling, the state Supreme Court emphasized that the responsibility for these registration defects lies with the Board of Elections, not with the voters themselves. The court found no substantial evidence that a significant number of the 60,000 contested ballots were cast by unverified individuals, suggesting the dispute centered more on procedural technicalities than on proven voter fraud.
The legal process has seen multiple changes in direction. Initially, a state appeals court ruled for a 15-day resolution period for disputed ballots, but the Supreme Court extended this window to 30 days. The recent federal appeals court decision has now blocked what Riggs’ campaign spokesperson described as a “confusing and burdensome cure process.”
Implications for the Election
The ruling introduces significant uncertainty into the North Carolina Supreme Court race. Military and overseas voters would have had 30 days to provide additional information to validate their votes under the previous order. Now, many of these ballots may be removed from consideration due to technical issues that voters will not have the opportunity to correct.
Griffin’s campaign has indicated it expects ongoing litigation and further delays in resolving the case. This prolonged legal battle highlights the tensions between ensuring election integrity and maintaining voter access, particularly for military personnel and Americans living abroad. With North Carolina being a crucial swing state in national elections, this case may have implications that extend far beyond a single judicial race.
The ruling comes at a time of heightened scrutiny of election procedures nationwide, with many states revising their voting laws and regulations. For North Carolina voters, particularly those serving overseas, the decision creates immediate confusion about whether their votes will count in the contested Supreme Court race, potentially affecting their confidence in the electoral system as a whole.
