Courts & the Law, News

North Carolina, the ne’er do-well state, immune from Voting Rights formula, but not court scrutiny

I_Voted_StickerUpdate: The News & Observer is reporting that Gov. McCrory will appeal the Fourth Circuit’s ruling, but without Attorney General Roy Cooper’s representation.

April 4, 2013, was a fateful day in North Carolina voting history. On that Thursday, GOP legislators Tim Moore, Tom Murry, Harry Warren and Ruth Samuelson filed an election reform bill designed to disenfranchise African-American — and by extension — Democratic voters.

How could the lawmakers lose? They held a Republican majority, backed by a newly elected Republican governor. Meanwhile in Alabama, a key voting rights case was being argued before the U.S. Supreme Court that could clear the path for the bill to pass federal muster.

For nearly 50 years, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act had required 40 counties in North Carolina and many parts of the South, to clear those changes because of the jurisdictions’ history of disenfranchising minority voters. The U.S. Department of Justice had used Section 5 to help ensure fairer elections in these areas with a checkered past. Now the federal government could not use its formula to impose these restrictions.

On June 25, 2013, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in Shelby v. Holder that the “coverage formula” used to determine which states and counties required federal approval before they made election changes was in fact, unconstitutional.

“North Carolina felt confident it wouldn’t be under any type of supervision,” says Guy-Uriel Charles, founding director of the Duke Law Center on Law Race and Politics.

One month later, on July 26, 2013, at 10:39 p.m. state lawmakers passed the election bill. All the yes votes were cast by Republicans; all the no votes were cast by Democrats. On Aug. 12, 2013: McCrory signs bill into law.

It took two years, but the Fourth Circuit Court has both overturned the law and revealed lawmakers’ discriminatory intent. Will North Carolina be exiled to the Section 5 doghouse?

It’s unlikely, Charles says. Since the Supreme Court struck down the coverage formula on constitutional grounds, it won’t be reinstated. Now the DOJ lacks a key statute to exert its authority. Congress could pass a new law and a new coverage formula, but that’s highly unlikely.

Instead, the courts will be the cudgel to keep ne’er do-well states in line. “The courts are sending a message to the states that if you pass these types of statutes, there’s a good possibility we will strike it down,” says Charles, who is also the Senior Associate Dean for Faculty & Research at Duke. “North Carolina thought no one was minding the store. But the Fourth Circuit says ‘We are minding the store.'”

 

Check Also

Prepare for a Texas duel as Smithfield hires new, and yes, out-of-state lawyer for upcoming hog nuisance trial

Over the summer, as Murphy-Brown lost three historic ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

Early voting has begun, and North Carolinians are turning out in droves at the polls. It’s a big yea [...]

Chief US District Judge Terrence Boyle, a New Jersey-born jurist known for his bristly disposition a [...]

More than two dozen people crowded into a conference room at the North Carolina Judicial Center Wedn [...]

If North Carolina goes forward with the recommendation to allow a private charter operator to take c [...]

The post Night of the Living Dead Issue appeared first on NC Policy Watch. [...]

On Monday night of this week, acclaimed education researcher Richard Rothstein spoke to community me [...]

There are a lot of strange – even downright bizarre – aspects to the ongoing effort by North Carolin [...]

The power of the vote extends beyond any single electoral outcome. It has the potential to lift up i [...]