NC Supreme Court Says Drawing Election Maps, Passing Voter ID Up To General Assembly, Not Judges

This has made Democrats Very Upset, because they aren’t in charge of drawing the maps. If they were, they’d gerrymander like mad. They are also upset over requiring that voters show who they are to vote, and, remember, Democrats are so racist that they claim that black people cannot get ID

NC Supreme Court says judges can’t stop partisan gerrymandering

The Republican majority on the North Carolina Supreme Court said Friday that partisan gerrymandering is legal in the state, opening the door for the legislature’s GOP majority to draw districts that help lock in power at the statehouse and contribute to Republican power in Congress.

The state’s high court also decided two long-running voting cases Friday: One dealing with the restoration of voting rights for felons and the other one of the state’s long-running voter ID cases.

The voter ID and gerrymandering decisions reverse opinions issued just last year by the state Supreme Court. In between, North Carolina voters flipped the court’s majority from Democratic to Republican. Friday’s opinions broke on party lines.

Chief Justice Paul Newby said the state’s judiciary doesn’t have the power to weigh in on partisan gerrymandering, and even if it did, the issue relies too much on the eye of the beholder to be decided by the courts.

“Our constitution expressly assigns the redistricting authority to the General Assembly subject to explicit limitations in the text,” Newby wrote in an opinion joined by the court’s other Republican justices, including Justice Phil Berger Jr., whose father is the Senate’s top Republican, and Justice Tamara Barringer, a former state Senator.

In other words, the general assembly has the power to draw the maps per the NC Constitution. It’s their power. The districts used to be pretty gerrymandered to favor Democrats when they controlled the GA.

“Those [constitutional] limitations do not address partisan gerrymandering,” Newby wrote. “It is not within the authority of this Court to amend the constitution to create such limitations on a responsibility that is textually assigned to another branch. Furthermore, were this court to create such a limitation, there is no judicially discoverable or manageable standard for adjudicating such claims. The constitution does not require or permit a standard known only to four justices.”

Obviously, the Democrats on the court are for the court amending the NC Constitution, since they cannot be in charge of drawing the maps.

The Court also said that voter ID is constitutional

“This law is one of the least restrictive voter identification laws in the United States,” he wrote. “Even if a registered voter still somehow fails to obtain or otherwise possess an acceptable form of identification, the law permits him or her to cast a provisional ballot that will be counted so long as they do not provide false information in the reasonable impediment affidavit. Essentially, North Carolina’s photo identification statute does not require that an individual present a photo identification to vote.”

Democrats are caterwauling over this. I wonder why?

In the felon voting case, Community Success Initiative v. Moore, the court reversed a trial court’s finding that allowed convicted felons to vote once they finished their prison sentence. The Supreme Court ruled that felons must complete all aspects of their sentence, including probation and/or payment of fines or restitution, in order to register and vote. The court’s Republican said this rule is not racist, as plaintiffs alleged.

That’s what the law says. Hence the ruling.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

4 Responses to “NC Supreme Court Says Drawing Election Maps, Passing Voter ID Up To General Assembly, Not Judges”

  1. Dana says:

    The car salesman from Carolina wrote:

    The districts used to be pretty gerrymandered to favor Democrats when they controlled the GA.

    Here in the Bluegrass State, the Democrats moan about gerrymandering, but Republicans first gained control of the state House of Representatives in the 2016 elections, under districts set by the Democrats following the 2010 census. When Republicans gained their huge majorities, 75-25 in the House, in the 2020 elections, it was still under the districts shaped by the Democrats.

    In 2022, following redistricting set following the 2020 census, the GOP increased its majority to 80-20, which is probably the maximum that they could earn; there are at least some Democrats left in Kentucky.

    In 2022, the Democrats did not even contest 44 of the 100 state House races, and in another — my district as it happens — no serious Democrat contested the race, so the Democratic primary, so the Democratic nominee was a perennial kook candidate so bad that the state Democratic Party disavowed him.

    The same thing has happened all over the ‘solid South,’ in which Republicans gained legislative majorities under districts drawn by Democrats.

    As Ronald Reagan once said, he didn’t leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left him.

  2. H says:

    Dana/Teach how do both of you personally feel about gerrymandering?
    I think it is wrong whether it is fine by Dems or GOPers.
    Do you think there is any solution?

  3. Jl says:

    Only crazy liberals would find a law that equally applies to every felon, black or white, as “racist”. Nice “logic”…

  4. JimS says:

    I had the notion of an anti-jerrymandering bill that would limit voting district boundaries to existing political and geographic boundaries and some small number of arbitrary boundaries.

Pirate's Cove