STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE COUNTY OF WAKE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION 18 CVS 15292 JABARI HOLMES, FRED CULP, DANIEL E. SMITH, BRENDON JADEN PEAY, and PAUL KEARNEY, SR., Plaintiffs, v. TIMOTHY K. MOORE, in his official [PROPOSED] capacity as Speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives; JOINT PRE-TRIAL ORDER PHILLIP E. BERGER, in his official capacity as President Pro Tempore of the North Carolina Senate; DAVID R. LEWIS,1 in his official capacity as Chairman of the House Select Committee on Elections for the 2018 Third Extra Session; RALPH E. HISE, in his official capacity as Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Election for the 2018 Third Extra Session; THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; and THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, Defendants. 1 David Lewis is no longer a member of the General Assembly. Plaintiffs Jabari Holmes, Fred Culp, Daniel E. Smith, Brendon Jaden Peay, and Paul Kearny Sr. (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants Timothy K. Moore, Phillip E. Berger, Ralph E. Hise (“Legislative Defendants”), the State of North Carolina, and the North Carolina State Board of Elections (“State Defendants,” and together with Plaintiffs and Legislative Defendants, the “Parties”) hereby submit this Proposed Joint Pre-Trial Order. I. List of Participating Counsel A. Plaintiffs’ Counsel SOUTHERN COALITION FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE 1415 W. Highway 54, Suite 101 Durham, NC 27707 Allison J. Riggs State Bar No. 40028 Telephone: 919-323-3909 [email protected] Jeffrey Loperfido State Bar No. 52939 Telephone: 919-323-3380 [email protected] Mitchell Brown State Bar No. 56122 Telephone: 919-323-3380 [email protected] Hilary Harris Klein State Bar No. 53711 Telephone: 919-323-3380 [email protected] PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP 1285 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10019 Andrew J. Ehrlich* Telephone: 212-373-3166 [email protected] David Giller* Telephone: 212-373-3561 [email protected] Amitav Chakraborty* Telephone: 212-373-3242 [email protected] Apeksha Vora* Telephone: 212 373 2706 [email protected] Ryan Rizzuto* Telephone: 212-373-3626 [email protected] PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP 2001 K Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20006 Jane B. O’Brien* Telephone: 202-223-7327 [email protected] Paul Brachman* Telephone: 202-223-7440 [email protected] Benjamin Symons* Telephone: 202-223-7471 [email protected] Taylor Williams* Telephone: 202-223-7405 [email protected] (* admitted pro hac vice) 2 B. Defendants’ Counsel State Defendants NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Post Office Box 629 Raleigh, NC 27602 Olga E. Vysotskaya de Brito Special Deputy Attorney General Telephone: 919-716-0185 Email: [email protected] Paul M. Cox Special Deputy Attorney General Telephone: 919-716-6932 Email: [email protected] Terence Steed Special Deputy Attorney General Telephone: 919-716- 6567 Email: [email protected] Legislative Defendants COOPER & KIRK, P.L.L.C. 1523 New Hampshire Ave. N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 David H. Thompson* Telephone: 202-220-9659 [email protected] Nicole J. Moss State Bar No. 31958 Telephone: 202-220-9636 [email protected] Peter A. Patterson* Telephone: 202-220-9670 [email protected] 3 Haley N. Proctor* Telephone: 202-220-9636 [email protected] Joseph Masterman* Telephone: 202-220-9648 [email protected] John W. Tienkin** Telephone: 202-220-9643 [email protected] Nicholas A. Varone** Telephone: 202-220-9665 [email protected] PHELPS DUNBAR LLP 4141 ParkLake Avenue, Suite 530 Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 Nathan A. Huff State Bar No. 40626 Telephone: 919-789-5300 [email protected] (* admitted pro hac vice) (** pro hac vice pending) II. Stipulations Counsel for each of the Parties hereby certifies that the Parties have met telephonically regarding stipulations of fact and testimony. Counsel also hereby certify that, in the same meetings, they discussed trial logistics, and have reached agreement on certain stipulations regarding those issues. The Parties’ Pre-Trial Stipulations are attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 4 III. Statement of Claims that Remain to be Tried A. Plaintiffs’ Statement Plaintiffs assert that Senate Bill 824 (“S.B. 824”) as enacted and subsequently amended by the North Carolina General Assembly violates the Equal Protection Clause of Article I, § 19 of the North Carolina Constitution because it was enacted with the unlawful intent to discriminate against African American voters. Plaintiffs allege, and contend that the evidence at trial will prove, that S.B. 824 bears more heavily on African American voters than white voters, that the enactment of S.B. 824 and its terms are consistent with the history of official discrimination against African American voters in North Carolina, and that the legislative history and events leading to the enactment of S.B. 824, including departures from the normal legislative process, reveal indicia of discriminatory intent. B. Legislative Defendants’ Statement Legislative Defendants assert that S.B. 824 as enacted and subsequently amended by the North Carolina General Assembly does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of Article I, § 19 of the North Carolina Constitution. Legislative Defendants allege, and contend that the evidence at trial will prove, that Plaintiffs have failed to carry their burden to show that S.B. 824 was enacted with the unlawful intent to discriminate against African American voters. Legislative Defendants also allege, and contend that the evidence at trial will prove, 5 that S.B. 824 was enacted for non-racial reasons, including to fulfill the North Carolina Constitution’s mandate that the General Assembly enact legislation implementing the Constitution’s photo voter ID mandate. C. State Defendants’ Statement Given its expansive and permissive qualities, S.B. 824 complies with the North Carolina Constitution. The State Board therefore stands ready to implement the law in a nondiscriminatory way. IV. Statement Regarding Trial Logistics A. Plaintiffs’ Trial Duration Statement Plaintiffs request approximately 30 hours of trial time, which encompasses their estimate for opening, closing, direct testimony of Plaintiffs’ witnesses, and anticipated cross-examination of Defendants’ witnesses. B. Defendants’ Trial Duration Statement Defendants request approximately 30 hours of trial time, which encompasses their estimate for opening, closing, direct testimony of Defendants’ witnesses, and anticipated cross-examination of Plaintiffs’ witnesses. C. Joint Statement Regarding Remote Trial Logistics The Parties have conferred telephonically and respectfully propose the following protocols for the conduct of the remote trial in this matter: 1. The Parties shall exchange and provide to the Court via Secure File Transfer Protocol (“SFTP”) copies of stamped Exhibits at least seven (7) days 6 prior to trial. If the Court, or any member of the Court, prefers hard copies of the Exhibits, the parties are prepared to deliver binders containing the Exhibits to Your Honors via FedEx. 2. When a witness is shown an Exhibit or examined on the contents of an Exhibit, the questioning Party shall make the Exhibit visible to the Court and other Parties. 3. All Exhibits admitted into evidence during any trial day shall be provided electronically to the Trial Court Administrator, or the Court’s Clerk or other designee, at the conclusion of each trial day. 4. In the event a Party wishes to introduce into evidence an Exhibit designated as CONFIDENTIAL or HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL under the governing Protective Order, the Parties shall meet and confer regarding appropriate steps to maintain the confidentiality of the Exhibit. If the Parties are unable to agree that the confidentiality designation should be withdrawn, the Parties will propose redactions to the Exhibit. If the Parties are unable to agree to redactions necessary to exclude the confidential or highly confidential information, any Party may move the Court for leave to submit such Exhibit under seal and conduct any examination on the Exhibit under seal. 5. The Parties will each have 45 minutes per side for opening arguments with Defendants’ 45 minutes to be split as mutually agreed upon by State and Legislative Defendants. 7 V. Deposition Designations The Parties have exchanged proposed deposition designations that may be offered at trial and objections and counter-designations thereto. The Parties will provide the Court with information on the Parties’ deposition designations in whatever form the Court prefers. VI. Exhibit Lists Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is the parties’ Joint Exhibit List. The exhibits are labeled JX[#]. Except as indicated, the parties do not object to the admission of the documents listed on the parties’ Joint Exhibit List and stipulate that they are admissible. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is Plaintiffs’ Exhibit List. Plaintiffs’ exhibits are labeled PX[#]. Defendants’ objections are indicated. Attached hereto as Exhibit 4 is Legislative Defendants’ Exhibit List. The exhibits are labeled LX[#]. Plaintiffs’ objections are indicated. VII. Statement of Relief Sought A. Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs seek declaratory judgment declaring that S.B. 824 as amended violates the equal protection clause of Article I, § 19 of the North Carolina Constitution. 8 B. Permanent Injunction Plaintiffs seek a permanent injunction barring the enforcement of S.B. 824 and allowing qualified, registered voters without acceptable photo identification at the