A fight over three ballots cast by voters who later died is heading back to center stage in Raleigh on Wednesday, as the North Carolina State Board of Elections convenes a 9 a.m. evidentiary hearing on June 24, 2026. At issue is whether Wake County election officials improperly counted those ballots in the 2024 general election, a decision that could ultimately cost some county board members their seats or lead to other sanctions.
Board schedules Cohen and Flynn hearing
In a notice from the North Carolina State Board of Elections, officials outlined a tentative agenda that includes an evidentiary hearing listed as “Cohen and Flynn (Wake County).” The meeting is scheduled to be held in person at the State Board offices in the Dobbs Building in Raleigh, and the notice says meeting materials will be added to the board’s online meeting folder as they become available.
How the dispute began
The current showdown traces back to the 2024 canvass, when the Wake County Board of Elections split 3 2 on a high profile question. The board voted to throw out 42 challenged early ballots but to accept three others. According to WRAL, those three accepted ballots were cast by Daniela Smith Davis of Garner, Michael Talbot of Rolesville and Wilfred Shea of Raleigh, all of whom died after voting.
That split decision, over just three ballots, quickly turned into a test case for how far county boards can go in interpreting state level election guidance when real voters and real votes are in the balance.
Guidance and legal gray areas
The State Board has tried to give counties a road map, telling local officials to judge voter qualifications “as of Election Day.” That language appears in the State Board’s Numbered Memo 2022 05, revised on Dec. 15, 2023, which explains how counties should handle challenges to absentee and early voting ballots.
But the memo leaves room for interpretation when a voter casts a lawful ballot, then dies before Election Day. That gap in the rules helped fuel formal complaints and lawsuits. In some counties, relatives came to hearings to argue that their loved ones’ votes should still count. In others, boards stuck more strictly to the State Board memo and removed questioned ballots.
Carolina Public Press has detailed how those differing reactions split county boards and led to protest filings that landed on the State Board’s doorstep.
The legal tug of war did not stop there. An administrative law judge initially ruled that the State Board had violated its own rules and ordered new hearings, only to later strike that order. That reversal created another layer of procedural limbo ahead of the June 24 session. Reporting in the Carolina Journal traces the back and forth in the Office of Administrative Hearings that ultimately sent the dispute back to the State Board.
Legal stakes and what the board can do
The State Board of Elections is not just a referee, it is also an enforcer. Under N.C. Gen. Stat. §163 22, the board has statutory authority to hear complaints and, in serious cases, to remove county board members for incompetency, neglect or failure to perform their legal duties. The same law authorizes the board to act on petitions, to compel compliance with election statutes and to set up a path for judicial review of its decisions in Wake County Superior Court. See N.C. Gen. Stat. §163 22.
What's next
Wednesday’s in person hearing begins at 9 a.m. and is open for the public to observe. Board members are expected to review testimony and other evidence in the Cohen and Flynn case before deciding how to respond to the Wake County board’s actions.
Whatever the State Board decides, whether that means dismissing the matter, sending it back for additional county level hearings or imposing sanctions, the outcome is likely to generate more court filings and closer scrutiny statewide. Those three disputed ballots are now poised to shape how North Carolina handles votes cast by people who die after early voting as the 2026 election cycle approaches.
