SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
eric holder
'Bloodless Coup': NC Supreme Court Partially Upholds GOP Vote-Tossing Effort
"It is no small thing to overturn the results of an election in a democracy by throwing out ballots that were legally cast consistent with all election laws in effect on the day of the election," one dissenting justice said.
Apr 12, 2025
In what North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein called a "dark day" for the state, the North Carolina Supreme Court on Friday delivered a partial victory to Republican Judge Jefferson Griffin, who is challenging some 65,000 votes in his bid to overturn the narrow win of his Democratic opponent and incumbent state Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs.
The Supreme Court, ruling 4-2, partially overturned an appeals court decision earlier this month that gave all the challenged voters 15 days to affirm their identities. Instead, the state's highest court ruled that around 60,000 ballots with registration inconsistencies would not be challenged, but approximately 5,000 overseas or military voters would have to verify their identities within 30 days. Riggs said she would challenge the ruling in federal court, and asked the court to temporarily block the order.
"I'm the proud daughter of a 30-year military veteran who was deployed overseas, and it is unacceptable that the court is choosing to selectively disenfranchise North Carolinians serving our country, here and overseas," Riggs said in a statement. "While I'm gratified to see the Court of Appeals reversed on the erroneous decision to potentially disenfranchise the more than 60,000 North Carolinians whose registration my opponent has recklessly challenged, I will not waiver in my fight to protect the fundamental freedoms for which our military service members and their families have sacrificed so much."
"This shocking decision abandons the judiciary's most basic role, to protect the rights of the people, and sanctions an outright attempt to steal an election."
Riggs won the November contest to remain on the state Supreme Court by 734 votes, but Griffin has challenged several thousand votes, predominantly on two grounds: Around 60,000 of the challenged votes are from in-state voters whose driver's license or social security numbers were missing from a state database of registered voters, while another approximately 2,000 to 7,000 are overseas or military voters who did not show ID when voting absentee. A significant number of the votes he challenged belonged to people living in Democratic-leaning counties.
The state Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the 60,000 in-state voters should not be challenged because their rights should not be denied due to “mistakes made by negligent election officials in registering citizens who are otherwise eligible to vote," as The New York Times reported.
However, the court allowed the challenge to the overseas votes to stand, even though overseas voters have never before been required to show ID since a state-voter ID law went into effect.
"Republicans are surgically targeting military voters from six counties and forcing them to re-prove themselves or be disenfranchised," Anderson Clayton, the chairwoman of the North Carolina Democratic Party, said in a statement reported by the Times.
Finally, the court also allowed the votes of nearly 300 voters who had never lived in North Carolina—often the children of North Carolina residents who turned 18 while living abroad—to be tossed.
If the state Supreme Court's ruling stands and the military and overseas votes are rejected, Griffin has said he expects it will be enough to tip the election in his favor, WRAL Newsreported.
The two dissenting justices vehemently condemned the majority decision.
"It is no small thing to overturn the results of an election in a democracy by throwing out ballots that were legally cast consistent with all election laws in effect on the day of the election," Democratic Justice Anita Earls wrote. "Some would call it stealing the election, others might call it a bloodless coup, but by whatever name, no amount of smoke and mirrors makes it legitimate."
Justice Richard Dietz, a Republican, broke with his party and agreed that the court should not alter election laws after the fact. He also criticized his colleagues for not hearing arguments before making their decision.
"By every measure, this is the most impactful election-related court decision our state has seen in decades," Dietz wrote. "It cries out for our full review and for a decisive rejection of this sort of post hoc judicial tampering in election results."
State and national Democratic Party leaders also spoke out against the court's decision.
"Today is a dark day for our courts and our state," North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein wrote on social media. "The North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that certain active duty military voters serving our nation must jump through hoops that other voters don't. All voters have a constitutional right to be treated equally under the law—it is foundational to our democracy. It's unconscionable, and this decision cannot stand."
Former Attorney General Eric Holder called the ruling "both a disgrace and legacy defining for those who put their names behind it."
"This shocking decision abandons the judiciary's most basic role, to protect the rights of the people, and sanctions an outright attempt to steal an election," he said in a statement. "The North Carolina Supreme Court's Republican majority has, for naked partisan reasons, cherrypicked whose votes count and whose do not. It is the height of political arrogance to tell military members who serve and sacrifice for our country, and other voters, that their votes and those of their family members are questionable."
Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Ken Martin said: "Jefferson Griffin doesn't get to pick and choose whose votes count in an election—no politician does. The men and women serving in our military will not allow their voices to be silenced by a desperate loser like Griffin."
"The nation is watching North Carolina," Martin continued. "Meanwhile, the DNC and Democrats across this country stand ready to marshal resources and manpower to ensure every vote cast in this election is counted. The people's voices will be heard, and Justice Allison Riggs will take her rightful place on the North Carolina Supreme Court."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Attorneys for Jones, Pearson Warn Tennessee GOP Against Further Retaliation
"The world is watching Tennessee," the lawyers wrote, adding that any retributive action would be unconstitutional and "require redress."
Apr 10, 2023
Ahead of the Nashville Metropolitan Council voting Monday to reappoint Tennessee Rep. Justin Jones to the state House of Representatives, attorneys for him and ousted Rep. Justin Pearson warned Republican legislators not to further retaliate against the pair.
The letter from the six attorneys, including former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, to Tennessee House Speaker Cameron Sexton (R-25) came after Republicans in the chamber voted last Thursday to expel Jones (D-52) and Pearson (D-86) over their protest in support of gun control after the Covenant School shooting in Nashville.
The missive also follows Pearson saying in a televised interview that he has "heard that people in the state Legislature and in Nashville are actually threatening our Shelby County commissioners to not reappoint me, or they're going to take away funding that's in the government's budget for projects that the mayor and others have asked for."
The GOP state lawmakers expelled Jones and Pearson "not for any criminal or unethical act, but for merely exercising their constitutional rights," the Democrats' lawyers wrote. "In so acting, the House Republicans not only wrongfully stripped these representatives of their rights as duly-elected legislators but also disenfranchised the voters they were elected to represent."
"Their partisan expulsion was extraordinary, illegal, and without any historical or legal precedent," the attorneys continued. "The House must not now compound its errors by further retributive actions."
\u201cIt\u2019s been the honor of my life to serve District 86 as their State House Representative. I want nothing more than to serve again & I\u2019m thankful that Scott Crosby @burchporter is representing us alongside @brotherjones_ & @EricHolder. May we continue to build this Movement! #TN3\u201d— Justin J. Pearson (@Justin J. Pearson) 1681148544
Should the Metro Nashville Council and Shelby County Commission vote to reinstate Jones and Pearson, the letter states, "such reappointment must lead to the full and immediate restoration of their rights as members of the House."
They "should be promptly sworn back in as members of the General Assembly and granted the same benefits, rights, duties, and liberties as any other member," the letter asserts. "That includes, but is not limited to, returning their parking and badge access to the state Capitol, which was cut off before their expulsion, restoring their benefits, including healthcare, which was immediately cut off upon expulsion, returning their status on committees, and being allowed to, in all manners, conduct legislative business the same as any other member."
"The world is watching Tennessee," the letter declares. "Any partisan retributive action, such as the discriminatory treatment of elected officials, or threats or actions to withhold funding for government programs, would constitute further unconstitutional action that would require redress."
In a statement Monday evening, Tennessee House Majority Leader William Lamberth (R-44) and Republican Caucus Chairman Jeremy Faison (R-11) said that "should any expelled member be reappointed, we will welcome them. Like everyone else, they are expected to follow the rules of the House as well as state law."
Jones returned to the House for Monday's evening session, fist raised.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Forget Your Feelings About Trump, Say Allies of NSA Whistleblower, 'Snowden Pardon Would Be a Major Win'
"Edward Snowden is a patriot. Our democracy is better off because of him," tweeted the ACLU. "As we said four years ago, the president should pardon him."
Aug 14, 2020
After President Donald Trump suggested in an interview published Thursday night by the New York Post that he is open to pardoning Edward Snowden, civil liberties advocates issued a fresh wave of calls urging the president to follow through and allow the American whistleblower to return to the United States.
The U.S.-based Freedom of the Press Foundation--for which Snowden serves as board president--tweeted a link to the Post report along with a "long and varied" list of individuals who have demanded a presidential pardon for Snowden, the NSA whistleblower who famously exposed U.S. government mass surveillance by leaking classified materials in 2013.
\u201cThe list of people who have called for @Snowden to be pardoned is long and varied. No matter your feelings on Trump, a Snowden pardon would be a major win for those who care about fighting back against mass surveillance in the digital age. https://t.co/pmgucTKr8Y\u201d— Freedom of the Press (@Freedom of the Press) 1597415413
The ACLU on Friday also responded to the report on Twitter, sharing a Los Angeles Times op-ed from September 2016 that was authored by the group's executive director Anthony Romero. He argued that "cases like Edward Snowden's are precisely the reason the president's constitutional pardon power exists."
\u201cEdward Snowden is a patriot. Our democracy is better off because of him.\n\nAs we said four years ago, the president should pardon him.\nhttps://t.co/PAsp56QDu4\u201d— ACLU (@ACLU) 1597415220
According to the Post, Trump polled his aides in the Oval Office on Thursday about whether he should allow Snowden to return from Russia--where the former intelligence contractor has lived in exile since 2013--without the risk of being imprisoned in the U.S., and the president said he was open to it.
"There are a lot of people that think that he is not being treated fairly. I mean, I hear that," Trump said of Snowden. As the Post reported:
Trump's comments reflect a remarkable softening in his views about the man he once deemed a "traitor" worthy of execution. Republican lawmakers and the Justice Department's inspector general recently highlighted misuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the secret FISA court to surveil former Trump adviser Carter Page.
"Snowden is one of the people they talk about. They talk about numerous people, but he is certainly one of the people that they do talk about," Trump said on Thursday, before turning to his aides. "I guess the DOJ is looking to extradite him right now? ...It's certainly something I could look at. Many people are on his side, I will say that. I don't know him, never met him. But many people are on his side."
"How do you feel about that, Snowden? Haven't heard the name in a long time," Trump reportedly asked his staff. "I've heard it both ways. From traitor to he's being, you know, persecuted. I've heard it both ways."
Snowden pointed out in a Friday tweet that "the last time we heard a White House considering a pardon was 2016, when the very same attorney general who once charged me conceded that, on balance, my work in exposing the NSA's unconstitutional system of mass surveillance had been 'a public service.'"
That comment came from Eric Holder during a May 2016 interview with David Alexrod. Holder, who also called Snowden's actions "inappropriate and illegal," ran the Justice Department under President Barack Obama in 2013, when Snowden was charged with theft of government property and violating the Espionage Act.
Journalist Matt Taibbi tweeted in response to Snowden that the fact that the whistleblower "has been in permanent exile while the creators/defenders of the illegal surveillance program he exposed have not only gone unpunished, but have been feted and given high-profile media jobs, is an ongoing outrage."
Even some right-wing politicians joined the calls for Trump to pardon Snowden. Michigan Congressman Justin Amash--who became an Independent and then a Libertarian after leaving the Republican Party last summer--tweeted his support for the whistleblower Friday:
\u201cEdward @Snowden is a whistleblower who exposed unconstitutional surveillance practices that violated the rights of millions. He deserves the opportunity to return to the United States and receive a pardon as part of a fair process that examines his actions.\u201d— Justin Amash (@Justin Amash) 1597428031
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) also said in a series of tweets Friday that the president should pardon Snowden--prompting a response from Cenk Uyger of The Young Turks: "Wow. I agree. Do you believe in miracles?"
\u201cWow. I agree. Do you believe in miracles? The more you take money out of the equation, the more the left and right-wing can agree. We should end Snowden's absurd exile. He's an American hero.\u201d— Cenk Uygur (@Cenk Uygur) 1597418449
The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald, who was was among the first journalists to report on leaked documents from Snowden, wrote in a long thread of tweets Friday that Trump talking about a pardon for Snowden and Massie expressing his support for one "should not obscure that this is not a right-wing view."
\u201cPraise for Snowden\u2019s heoric whistleblowing has also come from @BernieSanders, @CornelWest, Noam Chomsky and Washington Post media reporter @Sulliview:\u201d— Glenn Greenwald (@Glenn Greenwald) 1597408193
\u201cAnd now conservatives see how easily NSA\u2019s mass surveillance system, and the entire intelligence community apparatus, can be weaponized & abused for improper ends.\n\nWhat Snowden showed the world was crucial for it to know. He\u2019s spent 7 years in exile. He should be pardoned.\u201d— Glenn Greenwald (@Glenn Greenwald) 1597408193
Greenwald also shared the ideologically diverse list of signatories to the Stand with Snowden pledge and said it is "good to see" that Trump is "now open to the view of the ACLU and the New York Times, among others, that Snowden is a heroic whistleblower."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular