I voted in NC elections until I was 25, even though I attended law school out of state. Typically, you do not establish residency in the state of your undergrad (or even grad) college , although it is theoretically possible if you intend to live in that state going forward (which would be unusual with a basketball player).
Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
NC Supreme Court race - Riggs ahead +734 | Griffin loses in Fed Court, Concedes
- Thread starter rodoheel
- Start date
- Replies: 460
- Views: 30K
- Politics
- Messages
- 21,647
donbosco
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,525
He's a US citizen and wants to vote with ease where he lives I suspect.
Not sure what NC voting laws are, but typically you don’t have the right to vote where it is easiest. You have the right to vote where you are a permanent resident.
Not saying VAL is committing voter fraud. A college student could theoretically establish permanent residency in their college hometown. Just that it would be unusual.
Here is what vote.gov says about it. They seem to suggest that it is not that difficult to vote in your college state, depending when you move and depending on the laws of the state.
Voting as a college student | Vote.gov
Find out where and how to register and vote in national, state, and local elections as a college student.
And digging a little further, the NC site says you can vote in NC if you live there for 30 days prior to election and you don’t intend to return to your home state.
Registering as a College Student | NCSBE
Find out how to register to vote as a college student during the regular registration and one-stop early voting period.
www.ncsbe.gov
Last edited:
I suspect this gets a TRO while under federal circuit review.Not sure what NC voting laws are, but typically you don’t have the right to vote where it is easiest. You have the right to vote where you are a permanent resident.
Not saying VAL is committing voter fraud. A college student could theoretically establish permanent residency in their college hometown. Just that it would be unusual.
Here is what vote.gov says about it. They seem to suggest that it is not that difficult to vote in your college state, depending when you move and depending on the laws of the state.
Voting as a college student | Vote.gov
Find out where and how to register and vote in national, state, and local elections as a college student.vote.gov
And digging a little further, the NC site says you can vote in NC if you live there for 30 days prior to election and you don’t intend to return to your home state.
Registering as a College Student | NCSBE
Find out how to register to vote as a college student during the regular registration and one-stop early voting period.
The thing that is so odd to me is allowing a challenge after the fact to just some of the ballots. Either you challenge all similarly situated ballots or none. It is not fair to challenge ballots in just democratic counties. That is the issue that has stuck out to me from the beginning.
- Messages
- 1,266
Agree completely. But this is what you get with Republican judges without any morals or any respect for judicial ethics. It's a fundamental problem with our entire political system. The Republicans are absolulely amoral and the Democrats believe that some sort of baseline moral commitment to truth, justice, and fair dealing is a crtical to governmental behavoir and ethics.
ETA: But I must admit, I really can't say how I would act if Russia/FSB had the same sort of Kompromat on me as they obviously have on Trump in particular and who knows how many other Republicans in general. Whatever the FSB has on Lindsay Graham, I hope it never becomes public.
Last edited:
Also, if the NC Supreme Court votes are contested, why aren’t ALL votes for all elections contested?
- Messages
- 2,519
I have no clue
Wolfslayer
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 64
The poster child for anti-Greek life. Sumbitch is a KA...the authoritarianism is baked in. If you gotta buy your friends you're a cunt.
- Messages
- 1,387
It’s absurd.
- Messages
- 1,368
Mike Fox's first rule as the head baseball coach at UNC....you will absolutely NOT join a fraternity or participate in any fraternity related activities.
- Messages
- 21,647
“… Griffin, who lost to Riggs by 734 votes, asked the courts to toss the ballots of three categories of voters: About 60,000 early and absentee voters he alleged had incomplete voter registration information; about 5,000 military and overseas voters from some overwhelmingly Democratic counties who were not required to provide an ID; and more than 200 overseas voters who never lived in North Carolina but whose parents were registered here before they left the country.
Last week, Griffin won a key victory at the Court of Appeals, where he is currently a sitting judge. A Republican majority panel discarded the so-called never-resident votes and gave the other two tranches of voters 15 days to rectify their alleged infirmities. Democrats panicked. Tracking down more than 60,000 voters that quickly—some of whom might have moved—would be a herculean task. Because early voters generally lean Democratic and the overseas voters Griffin targeted were from blue counties, their votes would almost certainly cost Riggs the election
… In a brief opinion written by Justice Trey Allen, the court said the 60,000 ballots from voters with incomplete registrations should stay. The state’s case law made clear that registration errors “will not deprive the [citizens] of [their] right to vote or render [their] [vote]s void,” Allen wrote. And, he pointed out, all of them had presented an ID to vote, so there was no allegation of fraud.
Allen and Republicans Paul Newby, Phil Berger Jr., and Tamara Barringer agreed with the Court of Appeals on the other two tranches of voters, but extended the deadline for military and overseas voters to provide an ID from 15 to 30 days. They did not provide a rationale or explain why they believed the election board’s decision to allow these voters to cast their ballots without an ID—which was approved by the legislature-appointed Rules Review Commission and not challenged by any party or candidate before the election—was wrong.
As Earls pointed out in her partial dissent, they also did not specify how many overseas voters were affected. Griffin initially targeted Guilford County, then tried to expand his challenge to three other blue counties.
“Possibly at least 2,000 to 7,000 votes … are now presumed to be fraudulent unless they can prove otherwise within 30 calendar days,” Earls wrote. “The vote of an overseas or military voter who is registered in Wake County and who voted pursuant to the laws applicable at the time is counted. However, the vote of an overseas or military voter who is registered in Guilford County is presumed to be fraudulent and will not count unless that voter provides proof of their identity within thirty business days. Explaining how that is fair, just, or consistent with fundamental legal principles is impossible, so the majority does not try.”
… The majority also said little about its reasons for agreeing with the Court of Appeals that allowing never-residents to vote is unconstitutional. These voters have been allowed to cast ballots under a 2011 statute unanimously passed by the Republican-controlled General Assembly—a law that’s now been in effect for more than 40 elections. No one objected until the Republican National Committee sued shortly before the 2024 election.
… “The Court of Appeals has since issued an opinion that gets key state law issues wrong, may implicate a host of federal law issues, and invites all the mischief I imagined in the early days of this case,” Dietz wrote.
“By every measure, this is the most impactful election-related court decision our state has seen in decades. It cries out for our full review and for a decisive rejection of this sort of post hoc judicial tampering in election results.”
Dietz hinted that he expected federal courts might intervene. But even if that happens, “the door is open for losing candidates to try this sort of post-election meddling in state court in the future. We should not allow that.”
There are several potential federal issues. The ruling might run afoul of a federal law governing military and overseas voters. A decision that affects voters in some counties but not others could violate equal protection rules. Federal courts also have longstanding precedents forbidding states from changing voting rules just before—or, presumably, after—an election. …”
- Messages
- 2,519
Because the Courts that are screwing around with this are idiots My opinion