The Supreme Court ruling in North Carolina is governing the republican efforts to cancel the loss of elections in November

On Thursday, the Supreme Court of North Carolina refused to request the Council of State for elections to overcome the Court of Appeal in North Carolina and review the efforts of the Court of Appeal Jefferson Griffin Legal to deliver tens of thousands of votes in the state’s Supreme Court race.

Four judges of the Republican and the Great Court agreed, while two Judges-one of the only Republicans and Democrats to consider the case-opposed. In an agreed opinion, Republican Judge Tiri Allen argued that the Wake County Court, which listened to the arguments in the case earlier this month, did not explain enough ruling on the same day to support the election council’s decision to calculate the votes that Griffin appealed.

Allen said: “Perhaps I was affected by the matter of this court, which directs it to move quickly. The Supreme Court simply ruled against Judge Griffin without explaining the reason for rejecting his claims, from his point of view.” “Thus, if we want to take this case now, we will do this in the absence of any useful examination of these claims by the minimum court.”

He added that, given the importance of the case, the court will benefit from a “good and comprehensive evaluation of the parties of the parties” from the Court of Appeal.

the resolution To preserve the case in the Court of Appeal in North Carolina, a legal battle extends for months due to the loss of the Republican judge before the current Supreme Court. Judge Alison Resez, a democratic, was confirmed by 734 of voting twice by re -responding. Reges replied herself from the case.

Griffin filed a lawsuit against the state election council in December, and asked the Supreme Court to compel the Board of Directors to throw more than 65,000 votes claiming to be invalid after he previously rejected his electoral challenges. Griffin argues that votes should not be calculated either because voters have incomplete records for voters, and external polling cards won the identification of the necessary images or were made by voters who did not physically reside in the state. He says that throwing these sounds will turn his loss.

However, in court, Griffin’s lawyers have not proven that none of the disputed voters will be already unqualified.

Last month, the state’s Supreme Court prevented a certificate for the elections and later returned the case to the Supreme Court in the Wake Province, which quickly appealed Griffin. Riggs and Griffin restored themselves from the case as it appeared before the courts of each of them.

In a statement after a decision on Thursday, Reges said that she would continue to fight to confess to her victory in November.

“Regardless of the period in which this continues, I will continue to defend our federal constitutions and the basic freedoms of Caroline,” Regez said. “As constitutional employees, the judges must respect the will of the voters. The commitment to support the rule of law is the reason for my election to the voters to maintain my seat for more than 3 months.”

Griffin’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

in summary Before the decision of the Supreme Court in North Carolina, Griffin urged the court to refuse to seek the state’s election council for the discretion, on the pretext that the request is a “flagrant reflection of the council’s arguments.”

“The Board of Directors has successfully opposed Judge Griffin’s petition by insisting that electoral conflicts must follow the” normal path of judicial procedures “. Now, after he won that battle, the council urges this court to jump in the process I requested. “

In her opposition on Thursday, Democratic Judge Anita Erls, who has been constantly criticized by the court’s decisions in the case, indicated that the state law does not require an appeal from the Court of First Instance to go first to the Court of Appeal in North Carolina before the state’s Supreme Court heard is – it. She said that the failure of the Supreme Court to address the case is harmful to the parties of both the parties concerned and voters from Northern Caroline.

She wrote: “The delay of more delay at this stage continues to erode confidence in our elections and calls for questioning the ability of the legal system to ensure that the basic principles of democracy are able to recognize and impose it by a fair and fair judicial authority.”

Erlls also warned Griffin because of his opposition to the discretionary review request, specifically his assertion that the six court could float a decision and leave the Supreme Court’s decision in Wake County as the final ruling in this regard.

“In other words, he asks us not to hear the case because he might lose,” Elliz said. “Such a specific logic of the results has no place in a court committed to the rule of law.”

Reges and the Electoral Council in North Carolina previously tried to remove the case to the Federal Court, on the pretext that throwing the votes of thousands of North Caroline violated federal law. The Court of Appeal ruled in the fourth district that the case should be charged in the state court first, but allowed any prominent federal issues in the Federal Court.

The case will now continue in the Court of Appeal in North Carolina, according to a fast timetable, with an appeal by the state’s Supreme Court.