Court appears skeptical of ‘fair elections’ challenge to NC GOP-crafted voting maps
A panel of Superior Court judges appeared skeptical of a lawsuit targeting North Carolina’s new electoral districts, questioning why they should intervene in a process delegated to the Republican-dominated legislature.
The judges heard arguments Thursday on a motion from Republican lawmakers, who are defending the maps, to dismiss the case.
The lawsuit, brought by a former Republican Supreme Court justice, argues that voters have a constitutional right to “fair” elections and that their right is violated by new electoral districts that favor Republican candidates.
“I really think the concept of a fair election is as fundamental as you get in our system of government,” Bob Orr, the former justice, told reporters. “If you don’t have fair elections, then the whole legitimacy of government starts to crumble.”
Arguments from Republican leaders, who are defending the maps, hinged on a recent decision from the state Supreme Court in Harper v. Hall, which effectively ruled that partisan gerrymandering was a policy decision not within the authority of the courts to rule on.
After that ruling, state lawmakers enacted new electoral maps that they admitted were drawn to favor Republicans.
Phillip Strach, the attorney for lawmakers, argued that Orr’s attempt to find a right to “fair elections” within the state Constitution effectively amounts to a partisan gerrymandering challenge that is nullified by the Harper ruling.
“The so-called right that they’re latching onto here is not an expressed right in the Constitution,” Phillip Strach, the attorney for lawmakers said. “They’re reading something into the unenumerated language to find something that they like.”
The judges on the panel, Jeffrey Foster, Angela Puckett and Ashley Gore, all of whom are Republicans, also appeared to take issue with Orr’s reasoning, frequently questioning him about what exactly “fair” elections would mean in practice.
“The definitions you’ve given so far of ‘fair’ are ‘equality’ and ‘impartial,’” Puckett said. “Well, equality is equal, but you’ve told me you’re not looking for equal. Impartial is not being able to favor one side or the other — the Supreme Court has already ruled that partisan gerrymandering, which of course is not impartial, is constitutional.”
“I just don’t understand what you’re asking for in this case,” Puckett added.
Judges did not issue a ruling on Thursday, nor did they say when they may do so.
Orr rebutted claims that the Supreme Court’s decision precludes his argument, saying that his case dealt with specific districts and the rights of the voters in those areas — not the broader political implications of the entire map.
“We’re not asking for proportionality, we’re not here on behalf of the Democrats or the Republicans or the Green Party, or anybody else,” Orr said. “We’re here saying that all the citizens of this state have a right to fair elections.”
Formerly a longtime Republican, Orr left the party and registered as unaffiliated in 2021 and has been an outspoken opponent of former President Donald Trump.
The newly enacted electoral maps are being challenged in several other lawsuits, most of which argue that several of the new districts violate the federal Voting Rights Act by diminishing the voting power of Black and Latino residents.
This story was originally published June 13, 2024 at 4:49 PM with the headline "Court appears skeptical of ‘fair elections’ challenge to NC GOP-crafted voting maps."
