U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder dismissed all claims challenging the 2013 law in his decision. The ruling concludes a two-part trial that stretched over 21 days in July 2015 and January 2016, with testimony from 133 witnesses and over 25,000 pages of evidence, according to the Raleigh News and Observer.
Judge Schroeder’s decision leaves in place a host of election law changes that former North Carolina Senator Josh Stein called “the most dramatic rewrite of election laws in a generation” during his testimony in the July 2015 phase of the trial.
In addition to requiring voters to present one of seven state-approved photo IDs at the polls, VIVA cut seven days from North Carolina’s early voting calendar, prohibited the counting of out-of-precinct ballots and ended same-day registration, straight-ticket voting and a pre-registration program for 16- and 17-year-olds, among many other changes.
Judge Schroeder ruled same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting would remain in effect until after North Carolina’s June 8 primaries, when voters will select candidates for the North Carolina Supreme Court and U.S. Congress.
Immediately after VIVA’s passage in 2013, lawyers representing the North Carolina Chapter of the NAACP, the League of Women Voters of North Carolina and the U.S. Justice Department filed suit in federal court, claiming the new law discriminated against poor, elderly, student and minority voters.
Although the trio of lawsuits failed to overturn the law, Plaintiff’s lawyers are vowing to fight on.
“This is just one step in a legal battle that is going to continue in the courts,” Penda Hair, an attorney representing the NAACP, told the Associated Press.
North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory praised the ruling Monday.
“This ruling further affirms that requiring a photo ID in order to vote is not only common-sense, it’s constitutional,” he told WRAL. “Common practices like boarding an airplane and purchasing Sudafed require photo ID and thankfully a federal court has ensured our citizens will have the same protection for their basic right to vote.”
“We are already examining an appeal,” said Dale Ho, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project.
The next step for the Plaintiffs would be an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. A ruling before the November elections is considered unlikely.
Many legal experts expect the case to wind up before the Supreme Court.
