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].