Courts & the Law, Defending Democracy, News

Republicans set conditions for Democrats who requested speakers at judicial reform meeting

Senators Dan Bishop, Warren Daniel and Bill Rabon

The Republican lawmakers who head up a committee on judicial reform and redistricting have responded to Democrats’ recent request for certain speakers with their own set of demands.

Senators Terry Van Duyn, Floyd McKissick, Joel Ford and Jay Chaudhuri wrote a letter last week asking for seven speakers to appear at the Jan. 3 meeting “to hear from different perspectives and viewpoints.”

Committee chairmen Senators Dan Bishop, Warren Daniel and Bill Rabon, all Republicans, responded with two conditions that Democrats must meet before speakers who agree to appear can participate.

“One, you secure the Governor’s commitment to testify or send his General Counsel to share and answer questions about his views on judicial selection and redistricting, at the same meeting,” their letter states. “Two, you commit in writing by tomorrow to stay for the whole meeting and to offer a proposed map fixing the current unconstitutional judicial districts and your recommended changes, if any, to the judicial selection process, at the same meeting. We also will enter into the record the prepared speech of retired Judge [Don] Stephens, from whom in retrospect we should have heard on December 13.”

Gov. Roy Cooper sent Stephens to the last meeting to speak for him and the committee chairmen denied him a chance to participate because he did not work for the Executive Branch. Democrats protested by leaving the meeting early.

It was not immediately clear how Democratic senators responded to the letter, but a spokesperson said in an email that some of the conditions could not reasonably be met.

“Regardless of the terms of these conditions, it struck us that requests for information by committee members should not be conditional,” wrote Leslie Rudd, communications director for Sen. Dan Blue’s office.

One Comment


  1. Scott Bryan

    December 28, 2017 at 2:22 pm

    Who determined the districts were unconstitutional?

Check Also

Four-member county boards of elections change leadership today, but why?

Four-member county boards of elections are set to ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

Early voting in North Carolina is a big deal with a big turnout, but advocates are bracing for a neg [...]

Unless you’ve become lost or gone wandering, Hollister, N.C., population 674, in Halifax County is n [...]

As part of an ongoing effort to inform North Carolinians about the upcoming judicial elections, Poli [...]

As part of an ongoing effort to inform North Carolinians about the upcoming judicial elections, Poli [...]

The easiest way to push back against NC’s rogue General Assembly is to vote against all six proposed [...]

The post It’s getting deep… appeared first on NC Policy Watch. [...]

Six years ago, long before #AbolishICE, and long before Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) a [...]

Few times in recent memory have demanded a more careful examination of our nation's history tha [...]