North Carolina GOP Senators File Ethics Complaint Against Democrat State Supreme Court Justice over Pro-Abortion Reelection Campaign

Democratic candidate for the North Carolina Supreme Court Allison Riggs speaks at a primar
AP Photo/Karl B DeBlaker

Democrat North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs is up for reelection and has made abortion central to her campaign.

In one web advertisement, Riggs — who is endorsed by pro-abortion groups EMILY’s List and Planned Parenthood — said: “As women, we should be in charge of our own reproductive health care, but our rights are at risk. [Lt. Gov] Mark Robinson says he wants to ban abortion with no exceptions, and my opponent could decide if his ban becomes law. I’ll fight for your rights, protecting families like mine and yours.”

In response, three Republican state senators, who are also attorneys, filed a complaint against her with North Carolina’s Judicial Standards Commission, The Carolina Journal reported this month. An October 14 letter written by Republican state Sens. Buck Newton, Amy Galey, and Danny Britt and circulated to other Republican senators discusses the complaint and accuses Riggs of “blatantly violating” the code.

“As attorneys who value the integrity of our judicial process, it has become clear that Justice Riggs is guided more by the politics of winning an election rather than honoring the Code of Judicial Conduct,” the senators wrote.

“The Code prohibits any judicial candidate, regardless of the office they seek, from taking a position on any issue that may appear before their court,” the letter continued.

“However, Justice Riggs is blatantly violating the Code,” the senators wrote. “She is currently running attack ads against Judge Jefferson Griffin, outlining her position on specific issues that may appear before the court while stating what she perceives to be her opponent’s position.”

The letter further outlines how Newton asked the state Judicial Standards Commission to conduct a “full investigation.” The letter urges lawmakers to “monitor any future actions she may take between now and election day.”

“If judicial candidates are allowed to run campaigns on legislating from the bench, then we legislators will need to take action in the upcoming session to prevent such a breach of judicial conduct from ever happening again.”

Soon after the complaint was filed, an ad for Riggs’ challenger Republican Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin was released accusing Riggs of being a “radical liberal” who is “under investigation by the Judicial Standards Commission for her false ads.”

Subsequently, Riggs made the letter about the complaint lodged against her public on X on October 21 and denied any wrongdoing.

As the Journal noted, Judicial Standards Commission proceeding are typically confidential “unless the commission recommends some form of penalty against the judge.”

“Over the past 22 months on the campaign trail, you’ve heard me speak boldly about my values–including transparency, integrity, reproductive freedom, and democracy. Last week, I learned that three Republican senators falsely accused me of violating the code of judicial conduct,” Riggs wrote:

Let me be clear: I will not be intimidated by these Republican attacks on judicial independence and free speech. All voters deserve to cast an informed vote, which means knowing about my values and seeing the receipts on my opponent’s record.”

This is a troubling moment for judicial independence in our state. Members of the legislature should never be able to weaponize the nonpartisan Judicial Standards Commission to assist a political ally in winning a judicial election.

But this moment reminds all of us about what’s at stake in this election–integrity, transparency, and the separation of powers. Over the next fifteen days—and beyond—I will continue to speak boldly and fearlessly to make sure that North Carolinians can hold judges accountable.

On October 29, Riggs and her lawyer, Pressly Millen, who is the husband of State Board of Elections member Siobhan Millen, sent a cease-and-desist letter to the North Carolina GOP over accusations that Riggs is under investigation for her conduct.

“You are hereby on notice that that statement is both false and defamatory,” the letter reads in part. “Ms. Riggs has inquired of the North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission as to the truth of that statement and learned that no formal investigation of Justice Riggs is ongoing, and that Justice Riggs will be issued a notification only “in the event that [the issue] becomes germane to Justice Riggs.”

The NCGOP responded with its own letter the same day, stating that Millen’s letter “demanding a retraction hinges on a strained distinction between a “formal investigation” and the fact that Justice Riggs’ conduct is, indeed, presently under scrutiny by the Judicial Standards Commission.”

“The North Carolina Republican Party simply informed the public that a review of Justice Riggs’ ethical compliance is currently underway—a statement that is factually accurate and beyond dispute. Pretending there is no ‘investigation’ because a specific procedural label hasn’t yet been applied is nothing more than a semantic smokescreen,” the letter reads:

Senator Newton and other legislators formally requested an investigation into what they, and many others, view as a blatant disregard for judicial ethics by Justice Riggs.

The distinction you draw is a desperate ploy to obscure the fact that Justice Riggs’ actions are currently under ethical review. Whether you call it a “review,” a “scrutiny,” an “investigation,” or some other term, the reality remains: Justice Riggs’ conduct is under the microscope.

We have every right to keep voters informed of Justice Riggs’ wanton behavior. We will not retract truthful statements simply because Justice Riggs finds transparency inconvenient. Nor will we be intimidated by hollow threats of legal action designed to shield questionable conduct from public view.

The North Carolina Republican Party will continue to uphold the public’s right to know about the behavior of those seeking our state’s highest judicial offices.

Democrat Gov. Roy Cooper put Riggs into her current position in September 2023 and in her previous position on the state appellate court in 2022, The Center Square reported. Before that, she worked for the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, tending to various left-wing causes.

“My opponent spent her career at the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, leading some of the most polarizing and political litigation in our state. I believe the role of a jurist is to interpret the law, not make the law,” Griffin told The Center Square.

Riggs has accused Riggs of “extremism” because he believes in interpreting the Constitution as it was written. 

“He is someone who embraces a judicial philosophy called originalism,” she said at a Democratic “Taking Back the Courts” event.  “These folks who embrace originalism do so in a really rigid, extreme way. They use this judicial philosophy to chip away at my rights and your rights.”

Republicans currently hold a 5-2 majority on the state Supreme Court. The balance of the court would remain the same if Riggs is reelected. If Griffin wins, Republicans will hold a 6-1 majority. 

COMMENTS

Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.