A DBUNK subscriber submitted a request to fact-check the claim that North Carolina Supreme Court candidate Jefferson Griffin’s legal challenge to 66,000 ballots could change the outcome of the election. We investigated the claims presented in the Associated Press article (here) and uncovered some misleading information.
CLAIM: Jefferson Griffin argues that 66,000 ballots should be discarded due to legal issues.
ANALYSIS:
The article correctly states that Griffin is challenging about 66,000 ballots, but omits some critical context that makes his argument legally dubious. The claim rests on three disputed groups of votes:
1. 60,000 ballots from voters missing certain identification numbers. Griffin asserts these voters failed to provide either a driver’s license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number. However, North Carolina law does not require a voter to submit both to be eligible. A court affidavit revealed that nearly half of these voters actually did provide the required information but were still included in the challenge.
2. Overseas and military ballots. Griffin argues that hundreds of overseas voters who have never lived in the U.S. and thousands of military voters should have provided copies of photo identification. His argument contradicts state and federal law, which grants military and overseas voters certain exemptions under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA). The article fails to make this clear, misleading readers into thinking the ballots violated existing election law.
3. Procedural flaws in Griffin’s case. The article buries the fact that Griffin’s challenge was dismissed partly because he failed to properly notify voters whose ballots were being questioned. This is a serious procedural misstep that significantly hurt his case, yet it’s not given much weight in the reporting.
CONCLUSION:
The AP article provides an overview of the legal dispute but obscures key legal precedents that weaken Griffin’s case. The way the article presents both sides without emphasizing the outright contradictions in Griffin’s challenge could mislead readers into thinking he has a stronger case than he does. While Griffin has the right to appeal, the legal foundation of his claims is on shaky ground, making it unlikely that these ballots will be disqualified.
So How Could This Play Out?
Griffin’s best hope of success is to convince a higher court that the North Carolina election board overstepped its authority. However, state and federal precedents suggest the courts are unlikely to toss thousands of legally cast votes. If Griffin’s argument were upheld, it would set an extraordinary precedent—one that directly contradicts existing federal election protections for overseas voters and creates unnecessary barriers for thousands of North Carolinians.
Want More Fact-Checks Like This?
If you’re tired of misinformation and want unbiased, thorough verification of news stories, submit a fact-check request through DBUNK’s app. Our team investigates reader-submitted claims so you get the truth. Download DBUNK today and stay informed.
