In a voter ID case, the Supreme Court rules in favor of gop legislators

Thursday, June 23, 2022
author picture Gabriel Martim
Video/image source : youtube
Original content created by staff

North Carolina Supreme Court Upholds Voter ID Lawmakers Federal Appeal

The case before the North Carolina Supreme Court was about a new law that bans the use of photo identification at the polls. The law‚ pushed through by Democratic lawmakers in North Carolina‚ was upheld by a lower federal court‚ but Republican state leaders sought to intervene in the case. However‚ the district court denied their request for intervention‚ and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit upheld the lower court's decision.

WASHINGTON (AP) —. The supreme court republican legislators in North Carolina won a victory Thursday over the state's latest photo identification voter law. However‚ the 8-1 ruling does not resolve the long-running dispute about the voter ID law. It has been challenged in both state and federal court. This Supreme Court ruling means only that legislative leaders are allowed to intervene in federal cases to defend the law. An appeals court had ruled the interests of the legislators were adequately represented by the state attorney general‚ Democrat Josh Stein. Justice Neil Gorsuch stated: The people of North Carolina authorized their legislators to defend the constitutionality of state laws against challenge through the General Assembly. A federal court should ordinarily respect this kind of sovereign decision and not make presumptions in its favor. Justice Sonia Sotomayor voted against. In 2018‚ North Carolina's voters added a mandate for voter identification to the state constitution. The law in question was then adopted by legislators. To vote‚ voters must show photo identification -- either a driver's license or a passport. Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper vetoed the measure however‚ lawmakers overrode this decision. The NAACP of the state and several chapters at local levels immediately took action. Sued in federal court To stop enforcement of the law‚ arguing that it discriminates against Black voters and Latino voters in violation the U.S. Constitution.

Supreme Court overturns New York's gun laws that restrict concealed carry

A New York law restricting concealed firearm carry was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. CBS News Anne-Marie Green‚ Errol Barnett‚ and Joseph Blocker (codirectors of the Duke Center for Firearms Law) discuss the latest news. CBS News legal correspondent Rebecca Roiphe also contributes to the discussion. North Carolina's House Speaker‚ Tim Moore and Senate Leader‚ Phil Berger‚ both Republicans‚ wanted to join the federal court to defend the law along with lawyers for state. Stein said that he would not fight hard enough for the law. Federal judge said that the rights of lawmakers were being properly protected by Steins agency lawyers. The lawmakers were represented by a three-judge panel of federal appeals courts judges before they went to the federal appels court. Reversed the decision 9-6‚ that legislators should not be permitted to interfere. Berger expressed his gratitude for the Supreme Court's ruling and said that Stein and Cooper had previously opposed voter ID‚ which resulted in deliberately sandbagging law's defense. Moore stated in a press release that North Carolinians support voter identification and deserve the best representation. They do not need a weak defense from an attorney general with a history of supporting voter ID. Nazneen Ahmad‚ a spokesperson for the attorney Generals Office‚ stated in an email‚ that Stein will vigorously defend the state's law and would not oppose any attempt by legislators to participate in defense.

north carolina supreme court federal courts voter id lawmakers appeals court josh stein justice sonia sotomayor legislative leaders in a case the rules in favor of gop legislators

Stein‚ along with other state attorneys‚ wrote in a briefing to the justices that it was important to respect the power of the executive branch to defend the state at court. The law was a statute. Initially blocked The judge who heard the case said that it was not permissibly motivated at all by discriminatory intent. The appeals panel of three judges disagreed. Reversed her decision It was sent back to the U.S. District Court. A trial has yet to start. When a case is pending in a state court judges struck down the law as being tainted with racial bias. The North Carolina Supreme Court stated that it would take the case up‚ however no oral argument date has been established. Separately‚ North Carolina's highest court already has heard arguments in a case over whether the Constitution Amendment mandating voter identification should have been permitted on the November 2018 ballot. A state judge had ruled the GOP-controlled legislature was unable to place the proposed amendment or one of its companions on the ballot‚ as lawmakers were elected two years prior from districts with racially bias voting records. This decision was made later. Overturned on appeal Before going to the highest court of the state‚ where a decision is still pending. ___ Robertson was based in Raleigh‚ North Carolina.