DOCSLIB.ORG

Opinion and Order

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Opinion and Order IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA STATE CONFERENCE ) OF THE NAACP; EMMANUEL BAPTIST ) CHURCH; COVENANT PRESBYTERIAN ) CHURCH; BARBEE’S CHAPEL MISSIONARY ) BAPTIST CHURCH, INC.; ROSANELL ) EATON; ARMENTA EATON; CAROLYN ) COLEMAN; JOCELYN FERGUSON-KELLY; ) FAITH JACKSON; MARY PERRY; and ) MARIA TERESA UNGER PALMER, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) 1:13CV658 ) PATRICK LLOYD MCCRORY, in his ) official capacity as Governor of ) North Carolina; KIM WESTBROOK ) STRACH, in her official capacity ) as Executive Director of the ) North Carolina State Board of ) Elections; RHONDA K. AMOROSO, ) in her official capacity as ) Secretary of the North Carolina ) State Board of Elections; JOSHUA ) D. MALCOLM, in his official ) capacity as a member of the North ) Carolina State Board of Elections; ) JAMES BAKER, in his official ) capacity as a member of the North ) Carolina State Board of Elections; ) and MAJA KRICKER, in her official ) capacity as a member of the North ) Carolina State Board of Elections, ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________ ) LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF NORTH ) CAROLINA; A. PHILIP RANDOLPH ) INSTITUTE; UNIFOUR ONESTOP ) COLLABOARATIVE; COMMON CAUSE NORTH ) CAROLINA; GOLDIE WELLS; KAY ) BRANDON; OCTAVIA RAINEY; SARA ) STOHLER; and HUGH STOHLER, ) Case 1:13-cv-00660-TDS-JEP Document 429 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 485 ) Plaintiffs, ) ) and ) ) LOUIS M. DUKE; ASGOD BARRANTES; ) JOSUE E. BERDUO; CHARLES M. GRAY; ) NANCY J. LUND; BRIAN M. MILLER; ) BECKY HURLEY MOCK; MARY-WREN ) RITCHIE; LYNNE M. WALTER; and ) EBONY N. WEST, ) ) Plaintiff-Intervenors, ) ) v. ) 1:13CV660 ) THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; ) JOSHUA B. HOWARD, in his official ) capacity as a member of the State ) Board of Elections; RHONDA K. ) AMOROSO, in her official capacity ) as a member of the State Board of ) Elections; JOSHUA D. MALCOLM, in ) his official capacity as a member ) of the State Board of Elections; ) PAUL J. FOLEY, in his official ) capacity as a member of the State ) Board of Elections; MAJA KRICKER, ) in her official capacity as a ) member of the State Board of ) Elections; and PATRICK L. ) MCCRORY, in his official capacity ) as the Governor of the State of ) North Carolina, ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________ ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) 1:13CV861 ) THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; ) THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD ) OF ELECTIONS; and KIM W. STRACH, ) Case 1:13-cv-00660-TDS-JEP Document 429 Filed 04/25/16 Page 2 of 485 in her official capacity as ) Executive Director of the North ) Carolina State Board of Elections, ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________ ) Case 1:13-cv-00660-TDS-JEP Document 429 Filed 04/25/16 Page 3 of 485 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. FINDINGS OF FACT.......................................... 4 A. North Carolina Voting Laws........................... 4 1. Voter ID........................................ 4 2. Early Voting.................................... 5 3. Out-of-Precinct Provisional Voting............. 10 4. SDR............................................ 13 5. Pre-registration............................... 15 B. Post-2011 Legislation............................... 16 1. Introduction of HB 589......................... 17 2. Revision of HB 589............................. 21 3. Enactment of HB 836............................ 34 C. Procedural History.................................. 43 D. Evidence of Voter Experience Under Current Law...... 50 1. Voter ID....................................... 51 a. Voter Education about the Voter-ID Requirement Prior to the Reasonable Impediment Exception...................... 51 b. Voter Education After Enactment of the Reasonable Impediment Exception........... 56 c. Voters’ Experience in Acquiring Qualifying ID........................................ 68 d. Evidence of North Carolina Voters Without ID .......................................... 82 e. Availability of the Reasonable Impediment Exception................................. 95 2. Change in the Early-Voting Schedule........... 125 3. Elimination of SDR............................ 152 Case 1:13-cv-00660-TDS-JEP Document 429 Filed 04/25/16 Page 4 of 485 4. Elimination of OOP Provisional Voting......... 176 5. Elimination of Pre-Registration............... 184 6. Other Challenged Provisions................... 190 7. 2014 Data..................................... 194 E. Testimony of Other Experts......................... 197 II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW...................................... 197 A. Section 2 of the VRA............................... 197 1. The Law of Vote Denial and Abridgement Claims. 197 2. The Totality of the Circumstances & Gingles... 219 a. The Success of the Prior Practices in Fostering Minority Political Participation ......................................... 220 b. History of Official Discrimination....... 227 c. Racially-Polarized Voting................ 235 d. Enhancing the Opportunity for Discrimination ......................................... 237 e. Candidate Slating Process................ 238 f. Continuing Effects of Discrimination Hindering Participation.................. 238 g. Racial Appeals in Campaigning............ 257 h. Minority Electoral Success............... 259 i. Responsiveness of Elected Officials...... 261 j. Tenuousness of the State’s Justifications 263 i. Voter ID............................ 264 ii. Early Voting........................ 276 iii. SDR................................. 281 iv. OOP Voting.......................... 308 ii Case 1:13-cv-00660-TDS-JEP Document 429 Filed 04/25/16 Page 5 of 485 v. Pre-Registration.................... 317 3. Equality of Opportunity and Social and Historical Conditions.................................... 322 a. Voter ID................................. 325 b. Early Voting............................. 339 c. SDR...................................... 342 d. OOP Voting............................... 356 e. Pre-registration......................... 366 f. Cumulative Effect........................ 369 4. Discriminatory Result: Conclusion............. 373 5. Discriminatory Intent......................... 377 6. Additional Problems with the § 2 Results Claim 412 B. “Traditional” Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendment Claims............................................. 426 C. Anderson-Burdick Claim............................. 426 1. Voter ID...................................... 432 2. Early Voting.................................. 435 3. SDR........................................... 439 4. OOP........................................... 443 5. Pre-registration.............................. 448 6. CBOE Discretion............................... 452 7. Poll Observers and Challengers................ 453 8. Cumulative Effect of Provisions............... 454 D. Twenty-Sixth Amendment Claim....................... 456 E. Remedy............................................. 465 III. CONCLUSION.............................................. 467 iii Case 1:13-cv-00660-TDS-JEP Document 429 Filed 04/25/16 Page 6 of 485 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THOMAS D. SCHROEDER, District Judge. In these related cases, Plaintiffs seek to permanently enjoin Defendants from implementing various provisions of North Carolina Session Law 2013-381 (“SL 2013-381”), an omnibus election-reform law, as amended by Session Law 2015-103 (“SL 2015-103”).1 Plaintiffs are the United States of America (the “United States”) in case 1:13CV861, the North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and several organizations and individual plaintiffs (the “NAACP Plaintiffs”) in case 1:13CV658, and the League of Women Voters of North Carolina along with several organizations and individuals (the “League Plaintiffs”) in case 1:13CV660. Additionally, the court allowed a group of “young voters” and others (the “Intervenor Plaintiffs”) to intervene in case 1:13CV660. (Doc. 62 in case 1:13CV660.) Considered together, Plaintiffs raise claims under the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Twenty-Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution as well as § 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (“VRA”), 52 U.S.C. § 10301 (formerly 42 U.S.C. § 1973). (Doc. 365 in case 1:13CV861; Doc. 384 in case 1:13CV658; Docs. 1 & 63 in case 1:13CV660.) The United 1 The parties sometimes refer to the challenged law as “House Bill 589,” its original designation by the North Carolina General Assembly. The final product, as a duly-enacted law passed by both chambers of the General Assembly and signed by the governor, will be referred to as Session Law 2013-381. Prior to passage, the bill will be referred to as HB 589. Case 1:13-cv-00660-TDS-JEP Document 429 Filed 04/25/16 Page 7 of 485 States also moves for the appointment of federal observers to monitor future elections in North Carolina pursuant to § 3(a) of the VRA, 52 U.S.C. § 10302(a) (formerly 42 U.S.C. § 1973a(a)). (Doc. 365 at 33.)2 Defendants are the State of North Carolina, Governor Patrick L. McCrory, the State Board of Elections (“SBOE”), and several State officials acting in their official capacities. The record is extensive. The court held a four-day evidentiary hearing and argument beginning July 7, 2014, on Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction, which evidence is now part of the trial record. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)(2). Fifteen days of trial on the merits were conducted from July 13 through 31, 2015. An additional six days of trial on the voter photo identification (“ID”) provisions of the law were conducted from January 25 through February 1, 2016. The court has considered testimony
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Tea Party in North Carolina: Threat to a New Birth of Freedom
    THE TEA PARTY IN NORTH CAROLINA: THREAT TO A NEW BIRTH OF FREEDOM By Devin Burghart and Leonard Zeskind Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights The Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights is responsible for the content and analysis of this report. Additional materials, including updates and exclusive web content can be found at irehr.org. Copyright © 2014 Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights. All Rights Reserved. No Part of this report may be reproduced without the permission of the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights except for sections quoted with proper attribution for purposes of reviews and public education. The Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights (IREHR) is a national organization with an international outlook examining racist, anti-Semitic, white nationalist, and far-right social movements, analyzing their intersection with civil society and social policy, educating the public, and assisting in the protection and extension of human rights through organization and informed mobilization. INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH & EDUCATION ON HUMAN RIGHTS P.O. Box 411552 Kansas City, MO 64141 voice: (816) 474-4748 email: [email protected] website: www.irehr.org Contents Preface by Rev. Dr. William J. Barber II 1 Foreword: Exposing the Hard Right's Bag of Tricks Against Poor and Working 2 White People by Alan McSurely Introduction 4 Inside the Tea Party in North Carolina 7 Tea Party Membership in North Carolina 10 North Carolina Tea Party Chapters 18 Beyond Policy: North Carolina Tea Party’s
    [Show full text]
  • In the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA STATE CONFERENCE ) OF THE NAACP; EMMANUEL BAPTIST ) CHURCH; COVENANT PRESBYTERIAN ) CHURCH; BARBEE’S CHAPEL MISSIONARY ) BAPTIST CHURCH, INC.; ROSANELL ) EATON; ARMENTA EATON; CAROLYN ) COLEMAN; JOCELYN FERGUSON-KELLY; ) FAITH JACKSON; MARY PERRY; and ) MARIA TERESA UNGER PALMER, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) 1:13CV658 ) PATRICK LLOYD MCCRORY, in his ) official capacity as Governor of ) North Carolina; KIM WESTBROOK ) STRACH, in her official capacity ) as Executive Director of the ) North Carolina State Board of ) Elections; RHONDA K. AMOROSO, ) in her official capacity as ) Secretary of the North Carolina ) State Board of Elections; JOSHUA ) D. MALCOLM, in his official ) capacity as a member of the North ) Carolina State Board of Elections; ) JAMES BAKER, in his official ) capacity as a member of the North ) Carolina State Board of Elections; ) and MAJA KRICKER, in her official ) capacity as a member of the North ) Carolina State Board of Elections, ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________ ) LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF NORTH ) CAROLINA; A. PHILIP RANDOLPH ) INSTITUTE; UNIFOUR ONESTOP ) COLLABOARATIVE; COMMON CAUSE NORTH ) CAROLINA; GOLDIE WELLS; KAY ) BRANDON; OCTAVIA RAINEY; SARA ) STOHLER; and HUGH STOHLER, ) Case 1:13-cv-00861-TDS-JEP Document 420 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 485 ) Plaintiffs, ) ) and ) ) LOUIS M. DUKE; ASGOD BARRANTES; ) JOSUE E. BERDUO; CHARLES M. GRAY; ) NANCY J. LUND; BRIAN M. MILLER; ) BECKY HURLEY MOCK; MARY-WREN ) RITCHIE; LYNNE M. WALTER; and ) EBONY N. WEST, ) ) Plaintiff-Intervenors, ) ) v. ) 1:13CV660 ) THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; ) JOSHUA B. HOWARD, in his official ) capacity as a member of the State ) Board of Elections; RHONDA K.
    [Show full text]
  • Automated Anti-Blackness
    “Anti-racism is the active process of identifying and KENNEDY SCHOOLHARVARD JOURNAL OF AFRICAN AMERICAN POLICY HARVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL eliminating racism by changing systems, organizational JOURNAL OF AFRICAN AMERICAN POLICY A Harvard Kennedy School Student Publication structures, policies and practices and attitudes, so that power is redistributed and shared equitably.” - NAC International Perspectives: Women and Global Solidarity The Institutional Anti-Racism & Accountability (IARA) Project at Harvard Kennedy School's Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy works at the intersection of community programs, academia, and policy to address intellectual and practical questions related to anti-racist institutional change. Our vision is to achieve industry-wide certification standards for all forms of diversity/bias/ antiracism consulting and implementation. 2019 - 20 VOLUME20 Anti-Blackness in Policy Making: Learn more at Learning from the Past to Create a Better Future shorensteincenter.org/iara 2019-20 Volume HARVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL JOURNAL OF AFRICAN AMERICAN POLICY “Anti-Blackness in Policy Making: Learning from the Past to Create a Better Future” 2019-20 Volume Support the Journal Te Harvard Kennedy School Journal of African American Policy (ISSN# 1081- 0463) is the second-oldest student-run review published annually by the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. An annual subscription is $20 for individuals and $40 for libraries and institutions. Additional copies of past volumes may be available for $20 each from the Subscriptions Department, Harvard Kennedy School Journal of African American Policy, 79 JFK Street #16, Cambridge, MA 02138. Donations provided in support of the Harvard the Harvard Kennedy School Journal of African American Policy are tax-deductible as a nonproft gift under the John F.
    [Show full text]
  • Emailed Comments
    From: Required Field To: G&GEIS Subject: ?Comments on the Draft Atlantic G&G Programmatic EIS Date: Monday, April 30, 2012 5:55:20 PM Attachments: Frank T. Fazzino III Resume PDF LinkedIN.pdf I heard about the drilling poissibility from Curtis Wright, local radio show host & State Senator Thom Goolsby. I am one of many, who whole heartedly support offshore exploration. It can bring jobs to our area while lowering our depedance onEnergy from Terrorist Supporting Countries. Ifd you have bumper stickers, please let me know. North Carolina can take advantage of its own sel sustainability before nearby states begin slant drilling !! Come on overto North Carolina, we want you here !! Also, I would like to apply for entry level Floorman position, see my resume attached. Sincerely, Frank Fazzino -Wilmington NC, Resident & Supporter of Offshore Exploration & Extraction From: Nancy Danch To: G&GEIS Subject: "Comments on the Draft PEIS for Atlantic G&G Activities" Date: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 2:33:42 PM This action is totally uncalled for. BOEM's proposal to use airgun arrays to blast the ocean and seafloor with sound waves loud enough to pinpoint oil and gas deposits buried deep underground is not safe for our environment nor are is it safe for marine life. BOEM has no idea of the long term effects that marine life will suffer in their communciation, mating, and daily living activities that have existed long before our scientific community decided to blast their home. Isn't there enough harm that is caused by pollution, over fishing, etc.? BOEM does not need to add to this.
    [Show full text]
  • 2011-2012 Legislative Commissions Non-Standing Committees Interim Studies
    2011-2012 LEGISLATIVE COMMISSIONS NON-STANDING COMMITTEES INTERIM STUDIES RESEARCH DIVISION LEGISLATIVE SERVICES OFFICE NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY 545 LEGISLATIVE OFFICE BUILDING 300 N. SALISBURY STREET RALEIGH, NC 27603-5925 2011-2012 Final Edition [January 2013] NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY Legislative Services Office George R. Hall, Legislative Services Officer Research Division O. Walker Reagan 300 N. Salisbury Street, Suite 545 Director Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Tel. 919-733-2578 Fax 919-715-5460 January 21, 2013 MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the General Assembly FROM: O. Walker Reagan, Director – Research Division RE: 2011-2012 Legislative Commissions, Non-Standing Committees, Interim Studies Report This report contains lists of all permanent legislative commissions and non- standing committees and all studies authorized or directed to be undertaken by the 2011 General Assembly or authorized by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The listing not only includes studies undertaken by legislative bodies, but also those directed to be undertaken by other agencies of State government. Permanent commissions, committees, and other bodies of the executive and judicial branches are not included in this publication. For memberships of and information on other existing permanent executive and judicial agencies, please contact Ms. Cathy Martin, our Legislative Librarian, at (919) 733-9390 or the Governor's Director of Boards and Commissions, at (919) 715-0275. Mr. Brian Peck, of the Legislative Library, working with other legislative staff and executive branch employees, compiled and edited this publication. The explanation of the publication's format is on the following page. We hope that the publication will aid you and your constituents in rapidly getting accurate information on matters of government policy.
    [Show full text]
  • State of North Carolina Department of Justice Phone: (919) 716-6400 ROY COOPER Fax: (919) 716-6750 ATTORNEY GENERAL PO Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
    State of North Carolina Department of Justice Phone: (919) 716-6400 ROY COOPER Fax: (919) 716-6750 ATTORNEY GENERAL PO Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 October 3, 2013 North Carolina Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger North Carolina House of Representatives Speaker Thom Tillis Co-Chairs, Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental Operations Senator Stan Bingham Senator Thom Goolsby Senator Buck Newton Representative Jamie Boles Representative N. Leo Daughtry Representative John Faircloth Representative Pat Hurley Co-Chairs, Appropriations Subcommittee on Justice and Public Safety North Carolina General Assembly Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1096 Re: G.S. §114-2.5; Report on Settlement Agreement for Kmart Corporation G.S. §114-2.5; Report on Settlement Agreement for Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. G.S. §114-2.5; Report on Settlement Agreement for Ranbaxy, Inc. G.S. §114-2.5; Report on Settlement Agreement for Amgen, Inc. Dear Members: G.S. §114-2.5 requires the Attorney General to report to the Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental Operations and the Chairs of the Appropriations Subcommittees on Justice and Public Safety regarding all settlements and court orders which result in more than $75,000.00 being paid to the State. Pursuant to that statute, I am writing regarding the settlement of claims for Medicaid reimbursement to the State and Federal governments in the above-referenced matters. Pursuant to federal law (42 C.F.R. § 433.320) recoveries in these cases are shared on a pro rata basis by the State and Federal governments. October 3, 2013 Page 2 Kmart Corporation A Settlement Agreement has been executed between Kmart and the State of North Carolina.
    [Show full text]
  • NC Man Ch 5 NC Legislature 504.Indd
    The State Legislature The General Assembly is the oldest governmental body in North Carolina. According to tradition, a “legislative assembly of free holders” met for the first time around 1666. No documentary proof, however, exists proving that this assembly actually met. Provisions for a representative assembly in Proprietary North Carolina can be traced to the Concessions and Agreements, adopted in 1665, which called for an unicameral body composed of the governor, his council and twelve delegates selected annually to sit as a legislature. This system of representation prevailed until 1670, when Albemarle County was divided into three precincts. Berkeley Precinct, Carteret Precinct and Shaftsbury Precinct were apparently each allowed five representatives. Around 1682, four new precincts were created from the original three as the colony’s population grew and the frontier moved westward. The new precincts were usually allotted two representatives, although some were granted more. Beginning with the Assembly of 1723, several of the larger, more important towns were allowed to elect their own representatives. Edenton was the first town granted this privilege, followed by Bath, New Bern, Wilmington, Brunswick, Halifax, Campbellton (Fayetteville), Salisbury, Hillsborough and Tarborough. Around 1735 Albemarle and Bath Counties were dissolved and the precincts became counties. The unicameral legislature continued until around 1697, when a bicameral form was adopted. The governor or chief executive at the time, and his council constituted the upper house. The lower house, the House of Burgesses, was composed of representatives elected from the colony’s various precincts. The lower house could adopt its own rules of procedure and elect its own speaker and other officers.
    [Show full text]