Skip to content

Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
  • The Feed
Menu

“NC Supreme Court hears redistricting case arguments”

Posted on February 2, 2022February 2, 2022 by yellowdogrising

NC Policy Watch: “State Supreme Court justices were asked in oral arguments Wednesday to declare that redistricting plans the Republicans devised are so skewed that they violate voters’ constitutional rights, while lawyers for GOP lawmakers argued that redistricting should be left to the legislature.

Common Cause, the League of Conservation Voters, and a group of voters backed by the National Redistricting Foundation are challenging state Republican plans for new congressional and legislative districts as extreme partisan gerrymanders. The plans dilute Black voting power, plaintiffs argue, by reconfiguring districts where Black voters have been able to elect the candidates of their choice.

A trial court upheld the redistricting plans, leading to the challengers’ appeal.

In the lead-up Wednesday’s arguments, three of the justices, Republican Phil Berger Jr. and Democrats Anita Earls and Sam Ervin IV were asked to recuse themselves. None did, so the case will be decided by the full court, where Democrats hold a 4-3 majority.

The GOP redistricting plans “violate the fundamental rights of millions of North Carolinians,” said Stanton Jones, an attorney for the plaintiffs.

In a partisan gerrymander, leaders of the party in power sort the minority party’s voters into districts that minimize their influence, effectively predetermining the outcome of elections and entrenching the majority in power, he said.

“All three of the challenged maps here are extreme gerrymanders that violate the fundamental rights of millions of North Carolinians, and this court has the power and duty to say so,” Jones said.”

Archives

  • May 2025 (27)
  • April 2025 (58)
  • March 2025 (45)
  • February 2025 (52)
  • January 2025 (55)
  • December 2024 (33)
  • November 2024 (55)
  • October 2024 (56)
  • September 2024 (53)
  • August 2024 (46)
  • July 2024 (72)
  • June 2024 (38)
  • May 2024 (41)
  • April 2024 (49)
  • March 2024 (54)
  • February 2024 (44)
  • January 2024 (54)
  • December 2023 (41)
  • November 2023 (46)
  • October 2023 (53)
  • September 2023 (41)
  • August 2023 (50)
  • July 2023 (49)
  • June 2023 (52)
  • May 2023 (54)
  • April 2023 (59)
  • March 2023 (71)
  • February 2023 (42)
  • January 2023 (61)
  • December 2022 (48)
  • November 2022 (56)
  • October 2022 (62)
  • September 2022 (38)
  • August 2022 (51)
  • July 2022 (50)
  • June 2022 (60)
  • May 2022 (66)
  • April 2022 (67)
  • March 2022 (74)
  • February 2022 (54)
  • January 2022 (56)
  • December 2021 (59)
  • November 2021 (37)
  • October 2021 (58)
  • September 2021 (54)
  • August 2021 (54)
  • July 2021 (55)
  • June 2021 (59)
  • May 2021 (61)
  • April 2021 (61)
  • March 2021 (79)
  • February 2021 (67)
  • January 2021 (28)

Paid for by the Yellow Dog PAC and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.