“North Carolina\u2019s top court cleared the way for some voters\u2019 ballots in a contested state Supreme Court race to be tossed months after the election, opening a path for Republican Jefferson Griffin to potentially overturn an apparent narrow loss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, the extraordinary decision from the Republican-controlled court \u2014 which drew angry rebukes from Democrats and a sitting GOP justice in the state \u2014 still may see more litigation in federal court.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
…<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Griffin argued three categories of votes should be tossed: Voters who were registered to vote with incomplete voter registration data; military and overseas voters who did not meet the state\u2019s voter ID requirements; and overseas voters who have never lived in the state or expressed an intent to do so, a small category of voters who are generally family members of expats or service members.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Tossing out wide swaths of ballots after the election would be a near-unprecedented decision that voting rights groups, Democrats and even some Republicans condemned as violating voters\u2019 due process rights and changing the rules of an election after it has already been run.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
…<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“The state\u2019s high court ruled Friday that most of those ballots \u2014 coming from roughly 60,000 voters with incomplete registration data, which could include missing driver\u2019s license numbers or Social Security numbers \u2014 should still be counted for this election, placing the blame on the state board of elections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But the court\u2019s order has the latter two categories of voters at risk. The court ruled that military and overseas voters who didn\u2019t meet the identification requirement must prove their identity within 30 days \u2014 known as a \u201ccure process\u201d \u2014 or their votes could be invalidated, while affirming the lower court order that \u201cnever residents\u201d ballots, which amount to a couple hundred votes, should be disqualified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Friday\u2019s majority decision elicited scathing dissents from two of the court\u2019s justices \u2014 Anita Earls, the lone Democrat who participated in the case, and Republican Justice Richard Dietz.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n