You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.
News Analysis
Even as Republicans suffer setbacks in their fight to overturn a loss in a State Supreme Court race, judges have shown a striking willingness to entertain the long-shot challenges.

April 27, 2025, 5:01 a.m. ET
For months, Republicans in North Carolina have tried to do what President Trump and his allies could not in 2020: overturn an election that did not go their way.
What began as a sprawling effort to throw out 65,000 votes from the state’s Supreme Court election in November has shrunk to a legal skirmish over a small fraction of those ballots. But even as Republicans’ path to victory has narrowed, the final outcome still hangs in the balance.
And even if the Democratic candidate’s victory is not reversed, the battle may have sketched a blueprint for overturning future elections.
Never before, legal experts from both parties say, has a losing candidate gained so much legal traction in trying to nullify votes cast by people who followed every instruction given to them, both when they registered to vote and when they submitted their ballots. Federal and state judges have shown a willingness to entertain Republican challenges of votes in Democratic-leaning areas that focused on technicalities and sought to reinterpret voting laws long after Election Day.
The episode, which in many ways is an acceleration of the right-wing movement challenging the 2020 presidential election, could encourage election challenges from candidates who lose fairly but are inclined to fight the outcome. More races could be subject to litigation after the polls close, as candidates try to wipe out votes with help from friendly courts and deep-pocketed legal campaigns.
“The stakes are far greater than one seat on the State Supreme Court,” said Bob Orr, who served on the North Carolina Supreme Court as a Republican but has since left the party to become unaffiliated. He likened some of the recent judicial decisions clearing a path for votes to be tossed out retroactively to “opening up a Pandora’s box.”