No More “Vague Handwaving”: Applying the Overlooked “Person Aggrieved” Provision of the North Carolina Administrative Procedure Act to Election Litigation

The North Carolina Administrative Procedure Act requires claimants against state agencies to be “persons aggrieved,” meaning they have been “affected substantially” in their “person, property, or employment” by the challenged agency action. But in the 2024 general election, North Carolina state courts largely ignored this requirement, permitting plaintiffs to sue based on allegations of harm that some considered to reflect no more than “vague handwaving about election integrity.” This fact-light litigation strained state resources and reduced ballot access. But the solution is not so simple as just reminding courts that a statute exists. State appellate courts have never explained how the “person aggrieved” provision should apply to elections, so it has previously been unclear what plaintiffs challenging electoral regulations must show to satisfy the NCAPA’s “person, property, or employment” formulation. This Note dispels the confusion. It conducts the first ever comprehensive survey of the history and case law surrounding the “person aggrieved” provision and extrapolates how that provision should apply to elections. It concludes that to challenge electoral regulations under the NCAPA, the plaintiff must be a political party or candidate and must show that the challenged regulation stands to substantially affect the outcome of a specific race.