Unaffiliated voters defend lawsuit against NC state elections board | Eastern North Carolina Now

Unaffiliated voters are defending their federal lawsuit challenging the N.C. State Board of Elections. They object that state law guarantees only Democrats and Republicans can serve on the board.

ENCNow
    Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the Carolina Journal. The author of this post is CJ Staff.

    Unaffiliated voters challenging the structure of North Carolina's state elections board are defending their federal lawsuit. They filed paperwork Friday rejecting state legislative leaders' request to have the suit dismissed.

    "Common Cause and five of the 2.6 million unaffiliated voters in North Carolina bring this action. They ask the Court to declare unconstitutional the state law requiring all members of the State Board of Elections to be registered as Democrats or Republicans and barring unaffiliated voters from serving - even though unaffiliated voters outnumber both parties," wrote attorneys Edwin Speas and Michael Crowell. "The statutes violate plaintiffs' First Amendment rights to free speech and association and their Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection."

    Republican legislative leaders filed a motion on March 10 asking for the case to be dismissed. They argue that the plaintiffs lack standing to bring the lawsuit to federal court. Lawmakers also argue that state courts have ruled that the N.C. Constitution requires the governor to have control over the state elections board.

    State law requires the governor to choose the five-member board. He makes his appointments from lists of names provided by leaders of the two major political parties. No more than three board members can be members of the same party. In practice, this means the governor's party holds a 3-2 majority on the board.

    "The electorate differs dramatically today from when the State Board was first established," Speas and Crowell wrote. "Currently more voters are registered unaffiliated than for either party. Thirty-five percent are unaffiliated, and the percentage will grow as 42 percent of voters aged 25-40 are unaffiliated, as are 47 percent of those under 25."

    Lawmakers argue that none of the individual plaintiffs in the case has suffered a legal injury. None has applied to serve on the state elections board.

    This argument "misperceives and distorts" the case, Speas and Crowell wrote. "Their injury flows from the statutory bar interposed to the governor even considering an unaffiliated voter for appointment to the State Board, not from the failure of the governor to consider their applications for that position. Indeed, ... there is no way for any unaffiliated voter to apply for appointment to the State Board. That statute expressly requires the governor to appoint State Board members, and fill vacancies on the State Board, exclusively from lists of nominees submitted by the chairs of the Democratic and Republican parties."

    "Cementing that bar to the appointment of unaffiliated voters, the statute goes on to forbid the chairs of the Democratic and Republican parties from submitting to the governor the name of any person 'not affiliated' with their parties," Speas and Crowell added.

    "There may be instances in which a plaintiff may need to open an unlocked door to gain standing to seek redress for an injury, but surely no plaintiff must knock down a locked door to gain standing."

    The unaffiliated voters' lawyers stressed the importance of their case. "Recent elections starkly demonstrate how election administration is a foundational aspect of the right to vote," Speas and Crowell wrote. "The abstract 'right to vote' does not exist unless one can register, cast a ballot, and have that ballot counted."

    "When a president pressures election officials to 'find more votes'; when campaigns

    declare that election machines were programmed to change votes; when citizens disrupt vote counting - when those things happen they affect the right to vote,"
Speas and Crowell added. "In North Carolina, election board members decide who is qualified to register to vote, where they may vote, when they may vote, and whether their vote is counted. The State Board is where the right to vote is maintained."

    The latest filing assigns the label "severe" to North Carolina's election board restrictions. "By excluding unaffiliated voters entirely from serving on the State Board, North Carolina law severely restricts the rights of a large and identifiable group," Speas and Crowell wrote. "Those voters are united in their shared view that neither major party adequately represents them. It is that associational preference - to not be required to express allegiance to either the Democratic or Republican party - and that preference alone that completely excludes them from all major decisions of election administration."

    "Control over the entirety of election administration helps entrench the two major parties and is part of a long-term pattern of state law favoring the established parties over all other voters," the unaffiliated voters' lawyers added.

    Speas and Crowell rejected the notion that the current board guarantees a balanced approach to election administration.

    "A five-member board comprised of three members from a political party with which only 34 percent of voters affiliate, and two members from another party with which only 30 percent affiliate - but totally barring 35 percent of voters, based solely on their political preference - cannot in any sense be considered balanced," they wrote. "A state interest in a balanced election board is not to be confused with Democrats' and Republicans' interest in maintaining their monopoly at the expense of 2.6 million unaffiliated voters."

poll#147
Do you consider Election Integrity an issue of some real importance, or just another conspiracy theory interfering with Democratic Socialist political hegemony?
  No, complete access to everyone voting, even in a willy nilly manner, is more important than getting it right by limiting access to those that would commit Voter Fraud.
  Yes, the most inalienable right of real citizens of this Democratic Republic is the Right to Vote, and that right shall remain sacrosanct for perpetuity.
  Again, I don't vote and I don't care.
730 total vote(s)     What's your Opinion?

Go Back


Leave a Guest Comment

Your Name or Alias
Your Email Address ( your email address will not be published)
Enter Your Comment ( no code or urls allowed, text only please )



Comment

( April 21st, 2023 @ 7:28 am )
 
This is a liberal attempt to take over the board. The organization sponsoring this lawsuit, Common Cause, is an ultra-liberal pressure group that often allies with Democrats but almost never with Republicans. It very often works hand in glove with the Democrats on redistricting issues. The individual plaintiffs are just front men for Common Cause (an organization I sometimes hear conservative call Communist Cause). The way Locke writes this article, they seem to have someone on staff who is totally clueless.

If one looks at the voting behavior of Unaffiliated voters, the overwhelming majority are either straight ticket Republican voters (the larger group) or straight ticket Democrat voters. If one or more Unaffiliated are being placed on election related boards, it matters who does the appointing, as it can have a definiate partisan impact on control of the board.

A good example is the "non-partisan" redistricting board in Michigan. The Democrats managed to get several "Unaffiliated" voters onto it who although registered Unaffiliated had a history of major involvement in Democrat campaigns. The same thing happened some years ago when a redistricting board was set up in Arizona with one Independent member who turned out to be a liberal who voted in lockstep with the Democrats and gave them a highly partisan new congressional map.

When Locke puts out articles on political topics, they need writers who understand the actual politics of what is going on.



NC State asks federal court to dismiss athletics sex abuse case Carolina Journal, Statewide, Editorials, Government, Op-Ed & Politics, State and Federal NC Senate wants more say in appointment power


HbAD0

Latest State and Federal

At least one person was shot and killed during an assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump on Saturday at a political rally in Pennsylvania in which the suspected gunman was also “neutralized,” according to the U.S. Secret Service.
The State Board of Elections will hold a remote meeting at 10:30 a.m. Tuesday, July 16, 2024.
President Joe Biden formally rejected on Monday a bill in Congress that would require individuals to show proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in elections for federal office.
Those with access to President Joe Biden behind closed doors say that his condition is deteriorating at an accelerated rate
Republican lawmakers slammed President Joe Biden this week after an explosive report revealed that an ISIS-affiliated human smuggling network has brought more than 400 illegal aliens into the U.S.
Former President Donald Trump’s legal team filed documents in court on Thursday seeking to have Judge Arthur Engoron thrown off the civil fraud case against Trump in New York after they discovered that he allegedly engaged in “prohibited communications” with an outside party about the case.
Parts of the gag order against former President Donald Trump in his New York hush money case were lifted by Judge Juan Merchan on Tuesday, just two days before Trump is set to square off against President Joe Biden in the first debate of the election season.
'I am a white male and that’s not who they’re looking to promote at the moment,' the man told an undercover journalist.

HbAD1

 
Back to Top