Impartial Anita’s Former Law Partner, Allison Riggs, Pushes for Earls SCOTUS Appointment

Senator Amy Galey
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 28, 2022

Impartial Anita’s Former Law Partner, Allison Riggs, Pushes for Earls SCOTUS Appointment

Advocacy comes days before Riggs is set to argue a redistricting case in front of Justice Earls

Earls hasn’t recused even though she and Riggs spent years together as law partners suing the legislature on nearly identical cases

Bottom line: Impartial Anita is hearing a case argued by her former law partner and funded by her megadonor

Raleigh, N.C. — Justice Anita Earls refuses to recuse herself from a redistricting case funded by her campaign megadonor and argued by her former law partner, Allison Riggs.

Justice Earls and Riggs spent years litigating redistricting cases together against the Republican-led General Assembly.

Even Riggs’s social media banner image shows she and Earls standing in front of the U.S. Supreme Court before arguing a redistricting case together.

And this week, Riggs took to Twitter to advocate for her former law partner’s appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Does anyone believe Justice Earls is going to be impartial in this case? Of course not.

Earls and Riggs smile for a photo together in front of the U.S. Supreme Court before the court hears redistricting litigation the two worked on together.

Riggs promotes her former litigation partner’s campaign for state Supreme Court.

Justice Earls’s relationship with Riggs isn’t even her biggest conflict.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder funneled $250,000 to elect Justice Earls, and he’s funding the very lawsuit that’s now before her.

Sen. Amy Galey (R-Alamance) said, “This is what ‘impartial justice’ has become: A sitting Supreme Court judge hearing a case argued by her former law partner and funded by her campaign megadonor. This type of behavior, once begun, will not stop. The perception of corruption will destroy the legitimacy of the judiciary.”

Justice Earls’s conflicts are obvious and egregious. Imagine the outcry if, say, an oil company gave six figures to elect a judge and then brought a suit to overturn environmental regulations before that same judge.

Yet the so-called “good government” groups are silent. That should tell you all you need to know about their “principles.”