For several weeks, I’ve been covering the court cases over the election of Allison Briggs to the Supreme Court of North Carolina. Her Republican opponent has been contesting the election, using the Donald Trump approach of throwing anything against the wall and seeing what sticks. What he has mostly settled on is contesting overseas votes because the EXISTING LAW AT THE TIME did not require including an ID. But he didn’t contest all the votes. He only contested votes from 6 counties with large Democratic populations.

On Monday, a US District Court Judge appointed by Donald Trump in his first term denied the Republican challenge to those votes. Here are some of his objections:

“[The] case concerns whether the federal Constitution permits a state to alter the rules of an election after the fact and apply those changes retroactively to only a select group of voters, and in so doing treat those voters differently than other similarly situated individuals…This case is also about whether a state may redefine its class of eligible voters but offer no process to those who may have been misclassified as ineligible.” 

“Judge Griffin challenged the absentee ballots cast by overseas military and civilian voters in no more than 6 of those 100 counties.”

“The court observes a unifying principle: retroactive changes to election procedures raise serious due process concerns, particularly where those changes result in invalidating the votes of individuals who cast ballots in reliance on previously established rules.”

“The court concludes that the retroactive invalidation of absentee ballots cast by overseas military and civilian voters violates their substantive due process rights, and that the cure process violates their equal protection rights. The court further concludes that the lack of any cure process for individuals erroneously designated as Never Residents violates their procedural due process rights and represents an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote.”

I’ve said all along I can’t see how any court could allow a change of rules regarding voting eligibility AFTER the election has taken place, nor could it allow a LOSING candidate to try to throw out only the votes that presumably (based on voter registration) supported this opponent. I’m sad that my state courts allowed this rediculous case to continue for SIX months. However, after a Trump-appointed judge ruled against him, the Repubican candidate has decided not to appeal the decision. So half a year later, we finally have our elected NC Supreme Court Justice able to claim the role.

Obviously, this has been a concerning issue. But thanks to our court system, I believe it worked out as it should. To me, it is not just a state win, but a reminder than when we fight and stand up for our rights under the Constitution, Democracy wins.

Full disclosure: I voted for Allison Riggs. But honestly, I would be in favor of this court decision if she had been the one who lost the case. I would have abandoned all support for her if she was trying to throw out only the votes of people she thought hadn’t supported her.

It’s not about parties or politics; it’s about our fundamental principles. The sacred right to vote to choose our representatives needs to be protected and applied fairly whether or not our particular candidates won or lost.

So let’s celebrate that today and allow this success to empower us to continue fighting the good fight against assaults to our democratic processes.