Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

World

Fourth lawsuit will challenge NC voter ID law in July

Wake County Superior Court Judge Michael R. Morgan has refused to dismiss the case, captioned Currie v. North Carolina, after hearing arguments from both sides on January 30.

Judge Morgan’s written ruling was released to the public on February 24.

One State Case and Three Federal Cases

Signed into law by Governor Pat McCrory on August 12, 2013, VIVA is a comprehensive overhaul of North Carolina voting laws. The far-reaching changes reduce the number of early voting days, end same-day voter registration and require voters to present one of eight government-issued IDs in order to vote, among many other provisions.

In September 2013 a trio of lawsuits challenging VIVA were filed in federal court by the United States Department of Justice, the NAACP, the League of Women Voters and other groups. These federal lawsuits challenged multiple provisions of VIVA on the grounds that the law violated Section Two of the Voting Rights Act.

By contrast, Currie v. North Carolina was filed in North Carolina State Superior Court and challenges only one of VIVA’s provisions — the photo ID requirement.

Does VIVA Violate North Carolina’s State Constitution?

The plaintiffs in Currie v. North Carolina contend the photo ID requirement violates the state’s constitution by imposing both a financial cost and a property requirement on voters, by unlawfully adding extra qualifications to the right to vote and by violating the state constitution’s Equal Protection clause.

In court documents the plaintiffs specifically claim that by implementing VIVA, the State of North Carolina knowingly discriminated against African-American voters.

Lawyers representing the State of North Carolina and the North Carolina State Board of Elections say the photo ID requirement is merely an extension of the voter registration process and does not exceed the state constitution. They also argue that because the North Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles offers a free ID card, no cost is imposed on any voter.

A Judgement on the Pleadings

Both sides presented their arguments to Judge Morgan at a hearing on January 30 and asked for a ‘judgement on the pleadings.’

A judgement on the pleadings is a quick decision made by the court based on briefings and affidavits made by both parties. This kind of judgement is limited to cases where the basic facts are not in dispute.

In his February 24 ruling Judge Morgan denied two of the plaintiff’s claims.

The plaintiffs had argued the photo ID requirement violated the state constitution’s mandate that “all elections shall be free.”

But Judge Morgan ruled the word “free” in that context did not mean without charge.

A voter, he wrote, “inherently expends some measure of economic value — whether motor vehicle fuel, tire tread, transportation fare, shoe leather, or simply time,” in order to vote.

Instead, the free elections described in the constitution meant “free from constraint,” he wrote.

The plaintiffs had also claimed the photo ID provision violated North Carolina’s constitution by requiring citizens to own property in order to vote.

Judge Morgan disagreed. He ruled that previous appellate court decisions indicated requiring voters to show an ID card was not the same as requiring they own property in order to vote.

Requiring a voter “to possess personal property in the form of a photo identification does not constitute a property qualification which affects the right to vote or hold office,” he wrote.

Judge Morgan declined to rule on four other claims. These include claims the photo ID requirement violates the state constitution’s Equal Protection clause and discriminates against African-Americans.

The remaining claims could not be decided without a full presentation of all evidence, he ruled.

The case will go to trial in July 2015. If the photo ID requirement is not overturned, it will go into effect for North Carolina’s presidential primary in February 2016.

Written By

You may also like:

Tech & Science

Under new legislation that passed the House of Representatives last week, TikTok could be banned in the United States.

Social Media

Wanna buy some ignorance? You’re in luck.

Life

Platforms like Instagram and Pinterest often suggest travel destinations based on your likes and viewing habits.

Business

United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said the carrier was reviewing recent incidents and would redouble safety initiatives as needed - Copyright AFP Logan CyrusUnited...