OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

North Carolina v. North Carolina NAACP

Case Information

Date Filed: August 12, 2013
State: North Carolina
Issues: Voter ID, Voting Rights Act
Current Court: U.S. Supreme Court (Case 16-833)

Issue:

Do the provisions of HB 589 (Voter ID requirements) violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (42 U.S.C. 1973) and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the Constitution?

Status:

Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals opinion reversing District Court filed 7/29/16. Motion for Stay filed 8/3/16. Order Denying Stay filed 8/4/16. Emergency Stay Application filed with U.S. Supreme Court 8/15/16. Responses filed 8/25/16. Order Denying Stay filed 8/31/16. Emergency Motion to Enforce Injunction filed in District Court 10/1/16. Order denying Motion to Enforce Injunction filed 10/13/16. Order Denying Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal filed 10/19/16. Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss Appeal 11/1/16. Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed in U.S. Supreme Court 12/27/16. Response to Petition filed 1/19/17. Reply of North Carolina filed 2/13/17. Reply of North Carolina AG filed 3/9/17. Private Respondents' Motion to Add NC General Assembly as Petitioner filed 3/9/17. Petition for Writ of Certiorari denied 5/15/17.

Related cases: League of Women Voters of North Carolina v. Howard and United States v. North Carolina.

District Court Documents

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Documents (first appeal)

 

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Documents (second appeal)

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Documents (third appeal)

U.S. Supreme Court Documents

 

In the News

Edward B. Foley

Gerrymandering Is Headed Back to the Supreme Court

Professor Edward Foley was requoted in Mother Jones about a gerrymandering case in Wisconsin on its way to the Supreme Court. Other legal actions on partisan gerrymandering in Maryland and in North Carolina may be bound for the Supreme Court as well.

While previous Supreme Court cases have noted that partisan gerrymanders are “incompatible with democratic principles,” The New York Times originally reported, the court has never officially struck a case down. While it remains unseen how the Supreme Court will rule in the upcoming cases, a 2004 ruling from a previous gerrymandering case could play a pivotal role in how the court stands in the future. 

“The ordered working of our Republic, and of the democratic process, depends on a sense of decorum and restraint in all branches of government, and in the citizenry itself,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in 2004. Kennedy’s statement is “the most important line” in the decision, Foley told The New York Times, adding,  “He’s going to look at what’s going on in North Carolina as the complete absence of that. I think that helps the plaintiffs in any of these cases.”


 

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Wisconsin Gerrymandering Case

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider a gerrymandering case involving Wisconsin state legislative districts. The court also granted a request by the state to temporarily block the lower court\'s decision until the appeal is resolved. The case is Gill v. Whitford.

more info & analysis...