One Way to Protect Your Rights When Trump & the Supreme Court Won't
No one wants to talk about voting. I know.
But state Supreme Court races in North Carolina and Wisconsin are here to remind us that local elections matter, every vote counts, and there’s important news outside of Trump, Musk, and DOGE.1
Here’s a quick explainer, then we can all go back to hating RFK Jr:
State Supreme Courts are More Important Now Than Ever
In Washington, the U.S. Supreme Court is expanding Presidential power while taking away our individual freedoms.
State Supreme Courts, on the other hand, have recognized broad protections for abortion, ended partisan gerrymanders, and weighed in on vital issues such as environmental protection and criminal justice reform.
State courts can also help shift national norms, as we saw when a series of state-level victories for marriage equality helped shape the national mood and laid the groundwork for the U.S. Supreme Court’s federal recognization of marriage rights.
Republicans Are Trying to Steal a Supreme Court Seat in North Carolina
I’m sorry to sound so extreme about it, but that’s what’s happening.
One race in the country still hasn’t been certified since November: In North Carolina, voters re-elected Democratic incumbent Justice Allison Riggs over Republican Jefferson Griffin by 734 votes. A recount of every ballot in the state confirmed the result.
Three months after the election, Griffin refuses to concede. Instead, he went to court to cancel over 67,000 votes in an attempt to overturn the result.
The legal cases and appeals are complex, but they mostly boil down to a basic concept:
Griffin is trying to change the rules of the game after it’s been played.
North Carolinians voted according to the rules in place on Election Day (e.g., they registered to vote using a certified version of the state’s registration form).
Griffin wishes the rules had been different (e.g., voters should have been required to provide information the form didn’t ask them for).
Griffin says if voters used the approved form but didn’t find a way to provide the information he thinks should have been required, their votes should be tossed.2
This is a huge taxpayer expense, and it undermines faith in our system by making voters feel irritated and confused.
Worst of all, if Griffin’s ploy works it creates legal precedent that losing candidates in any state could try to use to overturn legitimate results in the future.
Wisconsin Sets the State for the First Post-Trump Election
In Wisconsin, a Justice is retiring and the election to replace her will determine ideological control the state Supreme Court.
The candidates are Susan Crawford, a liberal judge in Dane County, and Brad Schimel, a conservative judge in Waukesha.
Early voting starts in a month. Election Day is April 1.
The race doesn’t just have implications for the rights and daily lives of nearly 6 million Wisconsinites. It’s also being viewed as a barometer of the national political mood in the first 100 days of Trump 2.0.
Schimel showed a slight lead in a recent poll, while Crawford is ahead in fundraising.
Voting in local elections matters, and, if you’re able, supporting local candidates can make a huge difference.
If you don’t know where to start, I strongly recommend setting up an account at Oath.vote. Oath helps you identify where your donations are needed most and where they’ll have the greatest impact based on the races and issues you care about.
The President appoints federal judges, but only five states have a system where the governor appoints judges. Most states elect judges or have a hybrid system.
Details on the legal basis for the Griffin’s challenge are at Democracy Docket.