Neighbors on Call’s NC Policy Update for 4/04/22

Voting Rights

• “The voting rights of more than 50,000 North Carolinians remain in question as a lawsuit over just when the state must restore voting rights for people leaving prison moves through its third year… The underlying lawsuit, Community Success Initiative v. Moore, filed in 2019, argues that North Carolina’s long-standing felony disenfranchisement laws are unconstitutional, a vestige of Jim Crow laws meant to keep Black people from voting.” (More on this topic at Carolina Public Press.) Because this case has not yet reached a resolution, many people who would be affected by its outcome are not able to register to vote, even as absentee ballots are being mailed out for the May 17 primary elections and the April 22 voter registration deadline draws closer.

Health Care Policy

“The legislative committee considering Medicaid expansion and access to health care in North Carolina took up the contentious issue of allowing nurses with advanced degrees [to] diagnose illnesses and prescribe medicine without doctor supervision.”

Neighbors on Call’s NC Policy Update for 3/28/22

Voting Rights

• On Monday, March 21, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in one of North Carolina’s voter ID law cases, NAACP v. Berger, not about the merits of the law, but about who should argue the case. The office of North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein has represented the Board of Elections to defend the law’s constitutionality thus far, but Republican lawmakers who passed the law want to take over its defense. The Republican legislators claim that because Democrats like Stein are often against voter ID laws, the Attorney General’s office cannot defend the law as vigorously as they would. The NAACP, which brought the lawsuit originally, supported leaving Stein’s office in charge of the law’s defense. The U.S. Supreme Court may take some time to reach a decision on this side issue, leaving the underlying lawsuit on hold until then.

The Judiciary

• Last Monday Chief Justice of the NC Supreme Court Paul Newby replaced the Superior Court Judge on the Leandro school funding case. Superior Court Judge David Lee, who had been overseeing the case, had ordered lawmakers to provide $1.7 billion to adequately fund North Carolina schools. Newby replaced Lee, a Democrat, with Superior Court Judge Michael L. Robinson, a Republican, and provided no reason for the replacement. The NC Supreme Court agreed the same day to hear an appeal of Lee’s order to fund the Leandro plan, and they directed the trial judge (now Robinson) to review whether the order should be amended based on the recently approved state budget. The replacement took place during the same week that Carolyn Dubay, executive director of the North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission, seems to have been pushed to resign over a memo the Commission published reminding judges not to get involved in political campaigns during cycles when they are not up for election.

Neighbors on Call’s NC Policy Update for 3/21/22

Fair Representation

• On Thursday Republicans in the NCGA announced they were petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to review the state courts’ intervention in the process of drawing North Carolina’s congressional district map, arguing once more that the NC Supreme Court’s rejection of the state legislator-drawn map violated the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court already declined to weigh in on the map before the midterm elections, but they could take up the case in the fall, and any decision stemming from the case could have long-lasting impacts on the redistricting process in North Carolina and other states.

Economic and Housing Policy

• On March 10 the NC House passed a resolution urging Congress to provide state pension plans with a legal pathway to recover Russian assets. The resolution, which was requested by State Treasurer Dale Folwell, has no legal effect, but rather represents a symbolic effort to encourage Congress to change an existing law. At least 19 other states have proposed or passed similar resolutions through legislation or executive order, but North Carolina’s is unique in not directly requiring divestment of the state’s pension funds.

LGBTQ Rights

• On March 11 the North Carolina Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling about domestic violence protection orders, affirming that such orders must apply in same-sex dating cases. The high court’s vote on the ruling was 4-3, with all three registered Republicans dissenting. Previously North Carolina had been the only state in the country that did not allow domestic violence protection orders for people in same-sex relationships who weren’t currently or formerly married or cohabitating.