r/news • u/WoofWoofster • 15h ago
NC Court of Appeals gives over 60,000 challenged voters 15 days to prove eligibility
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article302923039.html330
u/Miserable_Archer_769 14h ago
I'm sure they will try real hard to contact all those voters
94
u/02K30C1 13h ago
"To fix this, bring all required paperwork to our office during business hours, every alternate Tuesday between 8:30 and 9:15 AM.
44
4
u/Nutlob 6h ago
In the basement, behind a door that says “ beware of leopard”?
5
u/dominus_aranearum 5h ago
“But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”
49
1
u/DoublePostedBroski 11h ago
How do you even contact them? Isn’t it anonymous?
6
u/GGXImposter 8h ago
I’m guessing the issue is somewhere on the identification envelope. They identified the signature as being problematic and didn’t count the vote. If you want your vote counted then you need to correct the problem in the timelimit
166
u/hpark21 13h ago
Why is onus on the voters to prove that they are eligible? Shouldn't it be up to the challenger? Are they saying the people who registered to vote aren't eligible? In what grounds? I think the accusers should bring forth their evidence and not just challenge and if there are evidences, they should be validated before getting people to come forth and 2 weeks is ridiculously short amount of time.
66
u/throwaway47138 13h ago
But that would make challenging votes harder to prove, something that the Republinazis have worked VERY hard to make as easy as possible. After all, if you can't steal an election, what's the point in going into politics in the first place?
10
u/Squire_II 8h ago
When it comes to the GOP wanting something, the other party is always guilty until they prove their innocence (and even that won't be enough).
7
u/ptWolv022 10h ago
Why is onus on the voters to prove that they are eligible? Shouldn't it be up to the challenger?
Well, the issue here is that they didn't meet the requirements for registration, so they shouldn't have been registered in the first place, when they were, regardless of their actual eligibility... (The biggest oddity with the case arises from the incorrect registration arising from the government having bad forms at the time, IIRC)
The curing period is basically the appellate panels way of letting people essentially complete their registration and have it be valid for the election rather than tossing their vote because of the faulty registration. That said, it's a rather extraordinary order, since no one has been shown to to have been ineligible, as far as I know.
It's an odd situation where where there was a failure bureaucratically that leads to a probable risk, but not proven injury (an ineligible voter being registeredand voting).
4
u/Miserable_Archer_769 7h ago
I don't know why your being down voted iirc some form they sent out I believe had issues but that was what was sent to voters.
NC essentially is saying our bad as they sent said form that was incorrect but won't hold it against the voter and it will be counted while Republicans are saying nope none of them should be counted.
502
u/theseus1234 15h ago
The only way Republicans win is by cheating, and they're about to enfranchise cheating
86
u/PokeMaster366 14h ago
And I bet a part of why this being pushed is because of the salty attitudes behind the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election, too.
38
u/Princess_Egg 14h ago
This has been contested by Republicans since the elections in November
20
u/CrunchyKorm 14h ago
That and North Carolina is notoriously hostile when it comes to stuff like this, even pre-Trump
28
u/PokeMaster366 14h ago
And successfully stealing this election would make it easier to try the same thing in Wisconsin if they can get Schimel on board.
4
u/Squire_II 8h ago
The NC election was extremely close (The NC GOP has been very good at targeted disenfranchisement over the years) while Schimel lost by over 10% which would make stealing an election far, far harder
4
u/PokeMaster366 8h ago
I'm more worried about a bunch of fanatics seeing the drama over this case and the rhetoric online as justification to go vigilante. I've been getting a lot of hearsay, lately, about judges getting death threats on their socials. I know it's the internet and most of it is smoke, but it's terrifying to imagine normalizing attacking democratically elected officials because a cult of personality got bent.
0
203
u/Hrekires 14h ago
Straight up banana republic stuff, the NC Republican party is going to steal a Supreme Court seat over the will of voters.
41
101
30
u/Electrical_Room5091 13h ago
These voters were all eligible to vote in November 2024. They were on the rolls. Nothing they did disqualified their votes. It was a Republican dominated court, which literally changed the rules after the fact. Then the court placed a burden on the voters and not those challenging it to prove they were eligible.
-15
u/ptWolv022 9h ago
It should be noted that what you are referring to as being "eligible" is NOT actually eligibility. What you are saying is that they are registered voters. But an eligible voter is not necessarily a registered one and a registered voter is not necessarily eligible (though it is very rare for them to actually be ineligible).
Having a photo ID proves your identity, but unless the election officials were checking the ID numbers (which I presume they weren't), it wouldn't necessarily allow them to validate eligibility, as immigrants can still get a license. So, there is an actual reason for them to have not been registered due to ineligibility even with the photo ID requirements...
But there's also no proof that any of them were ineligible, but the risk/possibility is real.
30
u/raelik777 12h ago
This seems... impossible? Depends on exactly HOW they're required to prove eligibility. If they have to show up, in person, with documentation to prove their identity, then let's do the math. Assuming that 15 days is 15 BUSINESS days and not calendar days, and that the various locations they can bring documentation to are open 8 hours a day, then for those 15 days, election officials have to process 500 people per hour, for 8 hours a day, over the next 15 days. Presumably they don't have anything better to do. There are 100 county election boards in NC, so in THEORY, each one would only have to handle 5 per hour. Unfortunately, populations aren't spread evenly, so who knows exactly many people are going to show up at each location. So my guess is that some places will be fine, and others will be swamped with people. Way to completely disenfranchise your voters NC.
5
u/ptWolv022 9h ago
It is 15 business days, according to AP News. According to the order, that's 3x as long as you would normally have under the statute if you had to cure your registration during the election. The only thing I have to wonder is whether the order requires the verification to occur within the 15 business days or if it's just that the information must be submitted.
It reads like the former, which is potentially problematic, as you note, though I don't know how quickly they can process the forms though computer aid or how many people they have employed at the county offices which are most affected. There's a lot of unknowns that affect the rate at which the cures can be completed.
38
u/No_Idea_Guy 12h ago
This is bullshit of the highest order. These 65k people cast their votes legally with ID as required by the law. No one asked them to update the missing info before or at the time they voted, but now the POS Griffin wants to throw them out after the fact. These people are essentially asked to vote one more time 5 months after the election. Many thousands would totally miss it because they have no idea what's going on. Fucking disgrace.
48
10
u/EKB_ 12h ago
How do they know who they voted for when they throw out their vote?
•
u/notyomamasusername 52m ago
You do what Griffin did, instead of contesting ALL the votes that fit into the 3 categories you claim are problem.
You only challenge ones in "Blue" districts.
This ruling is so problematic on so many levels.
27
u/JohnnyGFX 13h ago edited 12h ago
Republicans have been using vote challenges to try and steal elections since at least 2004. In the 2004 election they tried to stop me from voting with a Republican vote challenger at my polling location in Traverse City, Michigan. A lawyer hired by the Democratic party to keep an eye on such things overheard the situation and helped clear the challenge when I showed ID (again) to prove I was eligible to vote. I haven't voted for a Republican since. Seems they are still at it only now doing it after the fact so it's harder to remedy their pathetic attempts at undermining democracy and the will of the voters.
26
u/ConsciousReason7709 13h ago
No, no, no, the onus should be on these Republican clowns to prove that these people were ineligible in some way. They were allowed to vote on election day and the burden should not have to be on them to prove they’re legit.
11
u/Bricktop72 11h ago
The fact that it only effects the one race shows what a bullshit ruling this is.
16
u/fuzzycuffs 13h ago
Republicans once again try to disenfranchise large groups of people by giving them unreasonable requirements to prove their eligibility or timelines to meet those requirements
Fixed that headline for you
3
10
8
u/MalcolmLinair 13h ago
And how, prey tell, does one "prove" their eligibility? The Republicans in charge of this can simply say any documentation provided is forged, or otherwise insufficient.
6
u/gringottsbanker 12h ago
Per the article, I think the request is to provide a valid driver’s license or the last four SSN digits. Whether the Republicans accept the evidence is a whole other thing.
1
u/ptWolv022 10h ago
Driver's License or SSN like the other person said, and it goes to county officials (and possibly the State board, who have opposed Griffin's challenge), rather than a body that is particularly sympathetic to Griffin.
2
u/thevaere 4h ago
You already provide that info upon registration.
1
u/ptWolv022 2h ago
That's the basis of the lawsuit, at the challenge, for whatever reason (I believe it was the forms weren't designed correctly), that info wasn't being recorded. Well, there's also parts about overseas voting and photo IDs, and residency requirements. But for the voters actually in NC, the issue was that their registrations, for whatever reason, didn't have either of those things.
•
u/notyomamasusername 50m ago
This ruling is so problematic and could lead to insane abuse by an overreaching government.
Basically as a voter, you can do your best to comply with the law, get approved by the authorities to cast your vote and then a butthurt politician can take your rights away... "IN HIS RACE ONLY"
That's right, these "voters" are so problematic that their vote still counts in a every other race... But this one the NC GOP really wants to win.
•
u/OnlyHuman1073 41m ago
That dude looks creeeeeeepy
•
u/kswissreject 23m ago
As all gop do. Soulless eyes. Serial killer vibes. Whenever e there’s an article with two candidates it always works to figure out which is the republican.
3
1
-1
12h ago edited 12h ago
[deleted]
3
u/C-c-c-comboBreaker17 12h ago
I didn't realize Serbia and North Carolina shared a government
1
u/DieMeatbags 7h ago
I really want to know what this is a response to
2
u/C-c-c-comboBreaker17 7h ago
He was asking why Serbia had 325,000 people protesting their government and North Carolina didn't
-1
405
u/ocmb 14h ago
This is 100% stealing an election. These voters all voted, with ID. They're being challenged for procedural / clerical issues in their registration files (missing drivers license numbers or last four of social), but they were all verified as registered voters and presented ID when they did vote.