NC Asks To Halt Appeals Court Ruling Striking Down Voting Restrictions

NC Voter ID rules are posted at the door of the voting station at the Alamance Fire Station, Tuesday, March 15, 2016, in Greensboro, N.C. The state's new voter identification law requires that voters show a photo id... NC Voter ID rules are posted at the door of the voting station at the Alamance Fire Station, Tuesday, March 15, 2016, in Greensboro, N.C. The state's new voter identification law requires that voters show a photo identification before getting their ballot. Voters in North Carolina, as well as Missouri, Illinois, Ohio and Florida are casting their ballots in primary elections Tuesday. (Andrew Krech/News & Record via AP) MANDATORY CREDIT MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Correction: A previous version of this story mistakenly said that North Carolina’s motion had been filed with the Supreme Court. It had been filed to the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

North Carolina is asking the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to halt its ruling striking down the state’s voter ID law, and other voting restrictions the state passed in 2013. The state filed a motion for a stay with the appeals court Wednesday, asking the court to block implementation of the ruling while North Carolina readies a petition for the Supreme Court to hear the full case.

The motion argues that the state faces logistical issues in following the appeal’s court ruling ahead of November’s election.

However, it also previews how North Carolina says it will respond to the appeals court ruling in its petition for the Supreme Court to take up the full case.

North Carolina pushed back on the ruling by a panel on 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Friday that said Republican lawmakers passed that voter ID law and other restrictions with an intent to discriminate against African-American voters, which lean Democratic.

The state said the appeals court’s decision to overturn a district court’s ruling in favor of North Carolina was “unprecedented” and “presents serious federalism concerns as it impairs the right of North Carolina to adopt reasonable rules governing the time, place, and manner of elections.”

North Carolina also rebutted the appeals court’s discriminatory intent findings by pointing to increases in African-American turnout in elections where the voter ID law and other restriction were in place.

The motion said the appeals court misinterpreted Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, the 2008 Supreme Court decision that upheld Indiana’s voter ID law, and that the North Carolina case involves issues related to voting cases currently being litigated elsewhere in the country.

Read the full motion below:

Latest DC

Notable Replies

  1. Take back NC from the assholes.

  2. The motion argues that the state faces logistical issues in following the appeal’s court ruling ahead of November’s election.

    
    "Lordy, my gawd, how we gonna handle all these niggers!?!?!"
  3. Any SC experts here?

    Sure, they can appeal but will the SC even hear this appeal this late in the year?

  4. After yesterday’s debacle of a SC stay, specifically NC of all places see oportunity to get what they can begore a dem geys to fill the open seat.

    If it helps the cause of hurting dems in the general and getting a Repuke onto the bench, of course they would make this play…

  5. They only need a stay…

    If they can fix the 2016 election repubs will replace scalia and then the SC will continue to protect repubs.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

14 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for frasca Avatar for victorabrahamsen Avatar for dwward Avatar for mmurdoch Avatar for old_curmudgeon Avatar for humpback Avatar for grindelwald Avatar for steviedee111 Avatar for pb Avatar for jcblues Avatar for azjude Avatar for beattycat Avatar for jonney_5 Avatar for machoneman Avatar for charliedontsurf Avatar for maximus

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: