North Carolina voter ID case headed to trial

Judge declines to toss civil rights groups’ lawsuit

RALEIGH, N.C. — A federal trial over North Carolina’s photo voter identification law remains set for May after a judge refused last week to end efforts by civil rights groups that sued over the requirement on allegations that its provisions are marred by racial bias.

U.S. District Judge Loretta Biggs denied a “summary judgment” motion filed 2½ years ago for members of the State Board of Elections, which is implementing the 2018 ID law enacted by the Republican-controlled General Assembly. After legal delays in state and federal courts, the photo ID requirement under that law began with municipal elections last fall and the March 5 primaries.

Attorneys for GOP legislative leaders also defending the law had told Biggs that they supported the board’s motion, which if granted would have meant the law’s defenders would have prevailed without additional evidence or testimony. A trial is scheduled to begin May 6.

The state NAACP and several local chapters contend that the photo ID mandate, along with other provisions in the law, violate the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act by discriminating disproportionately against Black and Latino residents.

State attorneys for the elections board wrote in their 2021 motion that the NAACP’s evidence doesn’t show discriminatory intent by the legislature, and that burdens imposed on voters who lacked ID are “extremely limited.” Compared with a 2013 voter ID law that was struck down, the 2018 law expands the number of qualifying IDs.

Biggs wrote she was denying the board’s motion in part because “genuine disputes” over the facts in the case are present, and otherwise the legal parties “dispute the inferences which may reasonably be drawn from key undisputed facts.”

In late 2019, Biggs had issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law, saying it was tainted because the 2013 law had been struck down on similar grounds of racial bias. But the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of

Appeals reversed her decision, writing that Biggs had put too much emphasis on the past conduct of the General Assembly when evaluating the 2018 law.

Biggs mentioned the reversal last week but said the defendants weren’t necessarily entitled to a favorable ruling now because the standards for summary judgment are different. Any appeal of summary judgment decisions usually can happen after a trial.