North Carolina: Judicial Watch wants to join fray over voter ID law | News Observer

Judicial Watch, a conservative-leaning organization that uses litigation to make its political points, wants in on the legal fray over North Carolina’s elections law changes. The Washington-based organization filed a motion on Friday to intervene on behalf of North Carolina officials defending the new rules. “We think it’s a case of national importance,” said Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch president. In the court documents seeking status in the four-month-old lawsuit, Judicial Watch highlights an unsuccessful 2012 candidate for Buncombe County commissioner as the basis for the organization’s interest. Christina Kelley Gallegos-Merrill, a Republican who lost her bid for county office by 13 votes, contends that same-day registration during the early-voting period could have played a role in her loss.

North Carolina: Voting changes to go on trial in 2015 | Reuters

Challenges to North Carolina's new voter regulations that limit early voting and require voters to show photo identification at the polls will not go to trial until after the 2014 mid-term elections, a federal judge ruled on Thursday. The groups protesting the state's new law will have a chance, however, to argue for some of its provisions to be blocked before the full case is heard, Magistrate Judge Joi Elizabeth Peake said at a hearing in Winston-Salem. The law's opponents had sought a quicker resolution to the legal battle. A trial ahead of next November's elections would help prevent "irreparable loss" for some voters, said an attorney for the state chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. "It's going to determine whether people actually have the right to vote," said NAACP lawyer Daniel Donovan. "The clock is ticking."

North Carolina: Challengers of new voting regulations want 2014 trial; state officials push for delay | News Observer

Parties who are a gulf apart over what laws should be in place to ensure fair and open elections are just as widely divided about how quickly a lawsuit challenging new voter laws should be heard in federal court. On Thursday, attorneys for the NAACP, League of Women Voters, the ACLU of North Carolina and other voter rights advocates will gather in a federal courtroom in Winston-Salem to talk about one early point of contention – whether the trial will happen before or after the 2014 elections. Attorneys representing Gov. Pat McCrory, the N.C. Board of Elections and other state officials have laid out a proposed schedule in a report to the federal court, suggesting that a two- to three-week trial could be held no sooner than the summer of 2015.

North Carolina: Round one in the battle over voting rights in North Carolina | The Herald-Sun

Parties in the three federal lawsuits challenging voting law changes signed into law here in August will appear before U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder on December 12 to map out a schedule for proceedings moving forward. And while they’ve reached agreement on some preliminary litigation matters, the parties are not budging on one critical date: when the case should be tried. Those challenging the voting changes, including the North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and the League of Women Voters, say in papers filed with the court yesterday that all preliminary proceedings can be completed in time for a trial in the summer of 2014. That timing would ensure that changes set to take effect in January are reviewed by the court before the 2014 midterm elections. But the state defendants claim that such a schedule is unrealistic and are asking for a trial in the summer of 2015.

North Carolina: Coalition wants changes to district-drawing | NewsObserver.com

A coalition of groups is trying to take the politics out of the most political activity in state government: drawing legislative and congressional districts. The latest effort to end gerrymandering comes from groups representing organizations as diverse as the John Locke Foundation and the NC Policy Watch. The NC Coalition for Lobbying and Government Reform is holding community meetings across the state – the next will be Wednesday night in Apex – to drum up support for a big change that would likely lead to more legislative and congressional races. Efforts to cut ties between legislators and political mapmaking have been going on for years. But this is the first community campaign on the issue, said Jane Pinsky, the coalition’s director. Organizers hope to build enough support for nonpartisan redistricting to get a bill passed calling for a constitutional amendment on the 2016 ballot, she said.

North Carolina: Election law changes narrow use of provisional ballots | Winston-Salem Journal

Sometimes, you’re in the “right pew – wrong church,” said Doug Lewis, the executive director of the nonpartisan National Association of State Election Directors, as he talked about one of the ways people use provisional ballots. For years, voters in North Carolina have been able to use a provisional ballot for several reasons. Among them, they could have their vote counted even if they had shown up at the wrong precinct – the wrong church – to pick candidates. Not anymore. Among the sweeping changes brought by North Carolina’s new election law, the one requiring voter-identification by 2016 has drawn much of the attention, but the election law also implemented a slew of other changes. Under the new law, provisional ballots will still be counted under certain circumstances. For example, a provisional ballot will count if voters use one because they did not show up on the list of registered voters at their precinct but are in fact at the correct precinct and were properly registered before the election. But starting in 2014, voters will no longer have their votes counted if they use a provisional ballot outside their correct precinct.

North Carolina: Election Day drug bust violated policing best practices | Facing South

A month after 100 police, sheriff's deputies and special agents swooped in on the small North Carolina town of Mount Gilead the morning of Election Day and made dozens of drug arrests, there's still controversy around the timing of the Nov. 5 sting, which disproportionately affected African Americans. "It seemed kinda strange that they would have a bust on Election Day," said Leon Turner, an African-American resident of Mount Gilead. The election involved a highly contested mayoral race that pitted sitting Mount Gilead Mayor Patty Almond against challenger Earl Poplin, a former mayor of the town. Almond first ran for mayor in 2011 and lost by two votes, but it was later discovered that four black voters were denied ballots after their residency was challenged. The state board of elections eventually ordered a new election, which Almond won, taking office last December. She lost her re-election bid last month by about 90 votes.

North Carolina: Elections secretary answers complaint | Wilson Times

Both sides have made their case to state officials in the dispute over whether a local elections board member should be removed. The North Carolina State Board of Elections has received a completed formal complaint asking for the removal of Wilson Board of Elections Secretary Joel Killion. Asa Gregory and Barbara Dantonio alleged in their complaint that Killion violated state statues that limit election board members’ political activities. As exhibits to prove their complaint, Gregory and Dantonio sent information from the Tea Party website, information from Killion’s Twitter account, pictures of Killion in a Tea Party tent and newspaper articles. Gregory is former chairman of the Wilson County Democratic Party. Dantonio is former treasurer of the Wilson Democrats. But Killion has sent a response to the state elections board asking that the complaint be dismissed. Killion’s position is that he is not in violation of any statutes with his Tea Party activities. He even said Gregory’s statements were "libelous.”

North Carolina: Governor Claims Legislature “Didn’t Shorten Early Voting” | Care2 Causes

North Carolina’s legislative attack on voting rights this year was quickly recognized for what it was — the most restrictive set of laws since the Voting Rights Act of the sixties was put into effect. A myriad of new rules for voters were put into place with the bill, which was then signed into law by Republican Governor Pat McCrory. Now, the governor, facing an uphill battle for reelection, is trying to do a little history rewriting when it comes to limiting voter’s rights. One key piece of North Carolina’s law would drastically cut back on early voting, which is seen by many to be a key factor in increasing voter turnout and ensuring democratic participation when it comes to electing candidates to office. The legislature voted to eliminate a full week off the early voting calendar, decreasing it from 17 to just 10 days. Facing harsh criticism over that move, Governor McCrory is claiming that they actually didn’t shorten the early voting calendar at all. No, he says, they just “compacted” it.

North Carolina: Pat McCrory: We Didn’t ‘Shorten Early Voting,’ We ‘Compacted The Calendar’ | Huffington Post

On Aug. 13, North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R) signed into law a voter ID bill that was widely denounced by civil rights advocates. Not only did it mandate government-issued photo IDs at the polls, but it reduced the state's early voting period from 17 to 10 days. According to McCrory, however, he didn't actually shorten the voting. "First of all, we didn't shorten early voting, we compacted the calendar," said McCrory in an interview with MSNBC's Chuck Todd on Wednesday. "But we're going to have the same hours in which polls are open in early voting, and we're going to have more polls available. So it's going to be almost identical. It's just the schedule has changed. The critics are kind of using that line when in fact, the legislation does not shorten the hours for early voting."

North Carolina: Analysis: Women bear brunt of voter ID law | The Charlotte Post

The dust has settled from local elections in North Carolina, but the opposition to the state's new Voter Law - taking effect in 2016 - continues.  The law requires citizens to produce a state-issued photo ID at the polls. In a recent analysis, the Southern Coalition for Social Justice found that women make up 64 percent of the people who may be unable to vote as a result.  Holly Ewell Lewis of Raleigh votes regularly, and after state lawmakers passed the law, she traveled to her home state of Pennsylvania to resolve an issue with her photo ID. “I just felt that the summer was when I had the most availability to take care of it,” she explains. “So, even without the details, I just felt that I better be proactive and go as soon as I was able to.”

North Carolina: Lawsuits over North Carolina voting law head to court | News-Record

As the fall campaigns wind down, a battle is just beginning to brew over the state’s voting rules. A pair of suits filed locally in the wake of the General Assembly’s passage of the Voter Information Verification Act are now making their way through federal court. One lawsuit filed by a group of individual and political advocacy groups in August has a hearing scheduled for Dec. 12 in U.S. District Court. The other suit was filed by the U.S. Department of Justice in September. Defense attorneys have until Dec. 2 to file an official response to the latter suit. No hearings have been scheduled. The law, which Gov. Pat McCrory signed in August, will require voters to produce a photo ID to vote in 2016. Beginning next year, it will also shorten early voting from 17 days to 10 days and eliminate same-day registration during early voting. It also does away with counting provisional ballots cast by those who vote in the wrong precinct. A provision of the law that prohibits 16- and 17-year-olds from pre-registering to vote began this year.

North Carolina: Attorney General Takes Shots at the Laws He’s Obliged to Enforce | New York Times

The criticism could not have been much harsher: North Carolina’s Republican-led legislature had set out to undo 50 years of progress with a Tea Party-inspired “playground of extremist fantasies” that include tax giveaways to its richest residents and election law changes that make it harder for residents to register and vote. Attorney General Roy Cooper, a Democrat, has been very critical of several actions by the legislature. But the author of that scathing assessment in The Huffington Post last week was the North Carolina attorney general, Roy Cooper, a Democrat and the man whose job it is to enforce those laws, including the voting changes that have already become the subject of a federal lawsuit. His remarks brought a sharp rebuke from Gov. Pat McCrory and accusations from Republicans that Mr. Cooper is letting his ambition — he is widely expected to run against Mr. McCrory, a Republican, in 2016 — get in the way of his duties as attorney general. And the dispute between the two is a reminder of how deep and bitter the divide remains in a state still making sense of the fiercely conservative, boldly activist legislative session that ended in July. In a state long seen as a relatively moderate outlier in the South, the session was the first with a Republican governor and legislature since Reconstruction.

North Carolina: Governor fights for restrictive voting law | MSNBC

North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory wants a federal court to throw out a lawsuit against his restrictive voting measure–but he isn’t offering a reason why. McCrory, a Republican, also is telling a top Democratic state official to keep quiet about his opposition to the controversial law. The fate of the legal challenge to North Carolina’s voting law could offer a key indicator of whether existing protections are strong enough to stop the rash of GOP efforts to make voting more difficult, now that the Supreme Court has invalidated a key part of the Voting Rights Act. On Monday, McCrory and the state board of elections issued a formal response to an NAACP suit filed in August against North Carolina’s law. McCrory’s filing asked a federal court to dismiss the suit, but made no attempt to rebut the lawsuit’s claims or explain why the law is needed. Instead, it simply repeated multiple times that the governor and the board of elections “deny the allegations” contained in the suit. The bare-bones approach is likely an effort by the governor’s legal team to avoid tipping its hand before going to court. But voting-rights advocates seized on the filing to press their case against the law.

North Carolina: Don Yelton not so out of step with GOP on NC voter ID law | Facing South

By now you probably have heard about the reckless, racially insensitive comments Republican Party precinct chair Don Yelton of Buncombe County, N.C. made this week on The Daily Show. During an interview with correspondent Aasif Mandvi, Yelton defended North Carolina's voter ID law while acknowledging evidence of voter fraud is flimsy. He also referred to African Americans as “lazy blacks” and even uttered the word “nigger,” leading Mandvi to remark, "You know that we can hear you, right?" …  Yelton’s comments about black and student voters, voter fraud and kicking "the Democrats in the butt" are also in line with the work of the Civitas Institute, the conservative think tank founded and largely funded by North Carolina's Republican mega-donor and state budget director Art Pope, which helped build public support for the elections bill. One of the consequences of Civitas' crusade against nonexistent voter fraud is that black college students have been purged from voter rolls and faced challenges to their right to vote and run for office where they live and go to school. Yelton's remarks are also in line with what was said during state Senate hearings in April, when dozens of GOP county representatives testified in favor of the legislation. Jonathan Bandy of the N.C. Federation of Young Professional Republicans said voter ID laws weren't racist but claimed that racism is "the notion that an African-American and an Hispanic voter who don't have an ID are incapable of getting one" -- ignoring the fact that the law creates additional barriers for voters of color given that they are more likely than white voters to lack the ID needed to vote.

North Carolina: Governor Previews Defense Of Voter ID Law | TPM

North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R) delivered an extensive defense of the state's controversial new voter identification law on Monday. After slamming the Department of Justice's lawsuit against North Carolina as politically motivated and "without merit," McCrory argued in a speech at The Heritage Foundation that the law actually helps to get "the politics out of early voting" and generally represses voter fraud and malpractice. "But you know, we require a voter ID to get a tattoo, to get Sudafed, to get food stamps, to get on an airplane -- to get almost any government service in North Carolina right now you have to have an ID," McCrory said. McCrory went on to note that the new law includes a provision that provides a "free ID" voter voters throughout the state.

North Carolina: Officials ask court to dismiss elections law challenges | Charlotte News Observer

Gov. Pat McCrory and other state officials filed their first official response Monday to two of the three federal court lawsuits that challenge the extensive election-law changes adopted this past summer. In response to allegations by the NAACP, the League of Women Voters, several voters and other civil rights organizations, attorneys for the governor and state officials dispute plaintiffs’ contentions that the new measures are a blatant attempt to suppress the African-American vote. The filings offer few details of the legal strategy the attorneys representing the governor and the Republican-led legislature plan to employ in fighting the suits. They ask for the cases to be dismissed. Also on Monday, McCrory defended North Carolina’s law at an event in Washington held by the conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation.

North Carolina: Lawyers reject arguments in election lawsuits | The Asheville Citizen-Times

Attorneys for the state of North Carolina and Gov. Pat McCrory on Monday requested that a pair of federal lawsuits challenging substantial changes to portions of a law overhauling elections in the state be dismissed. Offering their initial formal responses to litigation filed in August on the same McCrory signed the bill into law, the lawyers denied all of the racial discrimination allegations made by civil rights and election advocacy groups and voters about the legislation. The lawsuits seek to throw out new rules requiring photo identification to vote starting in 2016, reducing the number of early-voting days by a week and eliminating same-day registration during the early-voting period, among other steps. The lawsuits argue the changes are dramatic and would make it disproportionately harder for black citizens to vote, turning back the clock on voting rights.

North Carolina: Democratic state official speaks out | Los Angeles Times

Roy Cooper is in a very lonely place. He's a Democratic state attorney general surrounded by conservative Republicans who control North Carolina state government. Now those Republicans have put Cooper in an awkward spot. He has publicly condemned GOP-sponsored laws on voter identification and gay marriage, yet must defend those same laws in court. Further complicating matters, Cooper plans to run for governor in 2016. That has prompted Republican charges that he's more interested in being governor than upholding North Carolina's laws.

North Carolina: In skirmish in national voting-rights wars, student once thrown off ballot wins race | Washington Post

Being thrown off the ballot was the best thing that ever happened to Montravias King. The national coverage that rained down on the Elizabeth City State University student when a local elections board in North Carolina rejected his initial City Council bid surely helped him break out from the field of candidates. He got the chance to plead his case, and his views, before millions, reaching many more people than a meager campaign budget could ever allow. This week, according to preliminary results, the university senior was the top vote-getter and will get to represent the ward where his school is located. Was turnout affected by the actions of the board in an increasingly partisan state atmosphere where restrictive voting laws have drawn legal action from many groups, including the U.S. Justice Department? King, who never stopped thinking local, didn’t take any chances, knocking on 365 doors for votes, he said in the News & Record. He said that in addition to his fellow students, he had gotten a “great and amazing” reception from older voters. That he had also discussed the issue of voter suppression with MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, who went to North Carolina for the story, was an unexpected extra.

North Carolina: McCrory: Cooper could be witness against NC in voter ID suit | WWAY

Gov. Pat McCrory says Attorney General Roy Cooper could wind up a witness against the state of North Carolina in a lawsuit the US Department of Justice filed against the state's new voter ID law. "Political statements by an attorney general of any lawyer can have a detriment(al) impact on their ability to defend our state," McCrory said. During a visit to Cape Fear Community College, McCrory, a Republican, was asked if he agrees with the opinion of one of his legal advisers that Cooper, a Democrat, compromised his ability to represent the state in the lawsuit.

North Carolina: What the Federal voting rights lawsuit could mean for North Carolina | Facing South

Yesterday U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder formally announced his plans to sue the the state of North Carolina for passing what many civil rights advocates have called the worst voter suppression law in the nation. Holder is filing suit under Section Two of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits denying or abridging voting rights for people of color. Holder is also requesting a federal court to enter the state of North Carolina into preclearance oversight under Section Three of the law. If the Justice Department's suit is successful, the state's new preclearance status will mean it will have to submit any election changes to the federal government for review to ensure no racial discrimination will result before they can be applied.

North Carolina: Cooper, McCrory disagree about defending lawsuit over voter ID | abc11.com

A war of words between Gov. Pat McCrory and Attorney General Roy Cooper is heating up over the lawsuit over voter laws. The two disagree on how to respond to Monday's lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice to block the state's tough new voter laws. Cooper calls the governor's decision to hire an outside attorney to defend the state a waste of money. He told reporters Tuesday that he may not personally agree with the new voter laws, but his office is more than capable of defending them. "There are laws that I have disagreed with personally that our staff have defended successfully," said Cooper. McCrory will not allow the attorney general's office alone to defend the state against the federal lawsuit to block North Carolina's new Republican-backed voting laws.

North Carolina: Voter law intentionally discriminates, Holder says | The State

The U.S. Justice Department’s lawsuit challenging North Carolina’s controversial voter ID law is the Obama administration’s latest forceful response to a Supreme Court decision that critics say gutted the 1965 Voting Rights Act. By claiming North Carolina legislators “intentionally” discriminated against minorities, the administration has taken up another fight with a Southern state over its voting laws. “We cannot, we must not, and we will not simply stand by as the voices of those disproportionately affected by some of the proposals we’ve seen – including the North Carolina minority communities impacted by the provisions we challenge today – are shut out of the process of self-governance,” Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday.

North Carolina: Justice Department challenges North Carolina voter ID law | Politico

The Justice Department filed suit against North Carolina on Monday, charging that the Tar Heel State’s new law requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls violates the Voting Rights Act by discriminating against African-Americans. Attorney General Eric Holder announced the lawsuit at Justice Department headquarters, flanked by the three U.S. attorneys from North Carolina. “Allowing limits on voting rights that disproportionately exclude minority voters would be inconsistent with our ideals as a nation,” Holder said. “And it would not be in keeping with the proud tradition of democracy that North Carolinians have built in recent years.” Holder charged that North Carolina’s legislation wouldn’t just incidentally hurt African American turnout, but was intentionally designed that way. “The Justice Department expects to show that the clear and intended effects of these changes would contract the electorate and result in unequal access to participation in the political process on account of race,” the attorney general said.

North Carolina: Justice Department Is Challenging North Carolina’s Extreme Voter Suppression Law | The Nation

The Justice Department filed suit against key provisions of North Carolina’s worst-in-the-nation voter suppression law in federal court today. The lawsuit alleges that North Carolina’s harsh voter ID law, cutbacks to early voting, elimination of same-day registration during the early voting period and ban on counting provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The Department also argues that these voting changes were enacted with intentional discrimination and thus North Carolina should have to approve all of its voting changes with the federal government for a period of time. “By restricting access and ease of voter participation, this new law would shrink, rather than expand, access to the franchise,” Attorney General Eric Holder said at a press conference today. Days after the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, “the state legislature took aggressive steps to curtail the voting rights of African-Americans,” said Holder. “This is an intentional attempt to break a system that was working.”

North Carolina: Gov. McCrory says Justice Department’s voting lawsuit is ‘overreach and without merit’ | News Observer

Gov. Pat McCrory on Monday called the U.S. Justice Department's lawsuit against North Carolina’s voting law “overreach and without merit.” “I firmly believe we’ve done the right thing. I believe this is good law. And I strongly disagree with the action that the attorney general has taken,” McCrory told reporters. The governor, dressed more casually than normal after his visit to the N.C. Zoo earlier in the day, struck a defiant tone in his remarks. He cast the legal battle as a matter of state’s rights, saying he would “defend our right to have common sense laws right here in North Carolina.”

North Carolina: Justice Department to sue North Carolina over voter law | Fox News

The Justice Department will announce Monday that it is suing the state of North Carolina for alleged racial discrimination over tough new voting rules. A person briefed on the department's plans told Fox News that the suit would claim that the North Carolina statute violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and would seek to have the state subject to federal pre-clearance before making "future voting-related changes." The person also said the suit would be filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Nashville, Tenn. In asking for pre-clearance, the Justice Department will ask a federal judge to place the four provisions in North Carolina's new law under federal scrutiny for an indeterminate period. The suit is the latest effort by the Obama administration to fight back against a Supreme Court decision that struck down the most powerful part of the landmark Voting Rights Act and freed southern states from strict federal oversight of their elections.

North Carolina: Justice Department Poised to File Lawsuit Over Voter ID Law | New York Times

The Justice Department is expected to sue North Carolina on Monday over its restrictive new voting law, further escalating the Obama administration’s efforts to restore a stronger federal role in protecting minority voters after the Supreme Court struck down part of the Voting Rights Act, according to a person familiar with the department’s plans. The lawsuit, which had been anticipated, will ask a federal court to block North Carolina from enforcing four disputed provisions of its voting law, including a strict photo identification requirement. The lawsuit will also seek to reimpose a requirement that North Carolina obtain “preclearance” from the federal government before making changes to its election rules. The court challenge will join similar efforts by the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division in Texas over that state’s redistricting plan and voter photo ID law. Those lawsuits are seeking to return Texas to federal “preclearance” oversight.

North Carolina: Voting changes affect students | The A&T Register

By 2016, college students and citizens in North Carolina will have to adhere to new policies in regards to voting. By way of a Youtube video, Governor Pat McCrory announced in August that he signed House Bill 589. “Common practices like boarding an airplane and purchasing Sudafed require photo ID, and we should expect nothing less for the protection of our right to vote,” the governor said. The bill will require voters to show photo identification at polling sites. However, only military ID cards, a valid driver’s license, passports, and tribal cards will be accepted. Student identification cards will not be an acceptable form. Eliminating the use of student ID cards as an acceptable form of identification forces students to not vote in the county of which their campus is located. College students must request an absentee ballot from the precinct of their permanent address or parents may pay a $2,500 fee so that their child may vote out of their district. It is also unclear if students will be able to use their on-campus addresses as their permanent residence in order to get a DMV issued ID.