In the lead up to the 2024 election, we’re hearing a lot about “politicizing” government institutions — usually by Republicans looking to shake public confidence in neutral bodies charged with maintaining law and order. But in North Carolina, the GOP is doing exactly what they accuse Democrats of doing.
State Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs is in the middle of a tight election to keep her seat. And she’s been hitting the campaign trail, talking about her stance on important issues that matter to voters, like reproductive freedom… And, relatedly, her opponent’s, Judge Jefferson Griffin of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, comments that “life begins at conception.” This is apparently a bridge too far for three Republicans in the North Carolina Legislature, and they filed an ethics complaint with the Judicial Standards Commission.
At Slate, Billy Corriher points out the absurdity of the move:
Three Republicans in the North Carolina Legislature have filed an ethics complaint against state Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs, a former civil rights lawyer who is running for reelection. Did she rule in favor of her father after refusing to recuse in the case, as her colleague has repeatedly done? No. Did she, as a Republican justice did, rule for a company whose stock she owns? No. Her alleged offense was talking about reproductive rights on the campaign trail and calling out her opponent for declaring that “life begins at conception.”
Interestingly, Griffin was ready to go with an attack ad:
The complaint against Riggs itself, as well as the GOP’s response to it, could raise further ethical issues. Ethics rules prohibit legislators from using public resources to help political candidates. Yet Riggs’ opponent, Judge Jefferson Griffin of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, had an attack ad ready to go referencing the “investigation” almost as soon as the ethics complaint was revealed. Moreover, a memo from the JSC instructs judges that ethics rules require that judicial campaign ads not “diminish public confidence” in the courts or be “intentionally misleading,” and it’s not clear if the JSC is even investigating Riggs or preparing to issue a “formal advisory opinion.”
This isn’t the first time this move has been busted out of the GOP playbook. In Wisconsin’s 2023 state supreme court election, challenger Janet Protasiewicz also made comments on issues relevant to voters — she spoke about reproductive freedom as well as redistricting maps — without committing how she would rule on a particular case. Protasiewicz faced an ethics complaint as a result, but it was eventually dismissed (after she won the election). Hopefully the case against Riggs faces a similar fate.
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1 or Mastodon @[email protected].
