Disbar Jefferson Griffin. Licensed attorneys shouldn’t attempt to overthrow democracy.

When Judge Jefferson Griffin lost his election to sit on the North Carolina State Supreme Court, he was within his rights to verify the results under state and federal law. But he went much further than that and in doing so, may have violated the North Carolina Bar’s Rules for Professional Conduct. We are calling on the Bar to investigate Judge Jefferson Griffin’s potential violations and hold him to the same standards that over 32,000 licensed attorneys in the state are required to uphold.

---

TAKE ACTION NOW

1. Download the Judge Jefferson Griffin Grievance (PDF)
2. Fill out the form with your information and sign it.
3. Email the completed document to complaints@ncbar.gov. Alternatively, you can print it out and mail it to the address at the top of the form.

---

I. ISSUE

Whether the actions of Judge Jefferson Griffin, following his defeat in the 2024 North Carolina Supreme Court election, constitute violations of the North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct sufficient to warrant disbarment.

---

II. BACKGROUND

In the 2024 election, Judge Jefferson Griffin narrowly lost his bid for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court to Justice Allison Riggs by approximately 734 votes. Subsequent to his defeat, Griffin initiated numerous legal actions aiming to invalidate around 65,000 ballots. His challenges particularly targeted ballots from military and overseas voters, who were exempted from photo identification requirements under existing North Carolina law. Griffin’s lawsuits, primarily affecting votes from Democratic-leaning counties, were widely rejected by state and federal courts.

These actions attracted significant criticism from within the legal community, with over 200 North Carolina legal professionals publicly urging Griffin to concede, citing concerns over public confidence in the judicial system. (Common Cause North Carolina).

III. ANALYSIS

The North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct relevant to Griffin’s actions include:

A. Rule 3.1 – Meritorious Claims and Contentions

Rule 3.1 mandates that a lawyer must only bring actions grounded in fact and law. Griffin’s persistent litigation, despite clear statutory provisions protecting the challenged ballots and repeated judicial rejections of his claims, strongly indicates frivolousness, potentially violating Rule 3.1 (Associated Press).

B. Rule 3.3 – Candor Toward the Tribunal

Rule 3.3 requires attorneys to avoid knowingly making false statements or failing to correct prior misstatements. Griffin asserted ballots were illegal despite clear statutory evidence to the contrary, raising concerns about adherence to the duty of candor toward the tribunal (The Guardian).

C. Rule 4.1 – Truthfulness in Statements to Others

Griffin made multiple public and judicial assertions that ballots were illegitimate, contrary to established law and judicial findings. These actions may constitute violations of Rule 4.1 by involving material misrepresentations (NBC News).

D. Rule 8.4 – Misconduct

Rule 8.4 categorizes dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, and actions prejudicial to justice administration as professional misconduct. Griffin’s conduct potentially undermined public trust and disrupted the lawful electoral process, implicating significant breaches of Rule 8.4 (Common Cause North Carolina).

---

IV. IMPACT ON LEGAL AND JUDICIAL INTEGRITY

Griffin’s post-election actions prompted widespread condemnation, highlighting substantial harm to public trust and the integrity of the legal profession. His pursuit of claims without sufficient legal or factual grounding risks diminishing public respect for the judiciary and the legal system (Stateline).

---

V. CONCLUSION

Given the gravity and clarity of Griffin’s alleged ethical breaches under Rules 3.1, 3.3, 4.1, and 8.4, a formal investigation and disciplinary proceedings by the North Carolina State Bar are warranted. Should these allegations be confirmed, disbarment would be an appropriate measure to safeguard public trust and uphold the standards of the legal profession.

---