North Carolina judge investigated for saying racial bias exists files lawsuit
A North Carolina supreme court justice is suing the state’s judicial standards commission for allegedly violating her right to freedom of speech. After Justice Anita Earls made public comments about the lack of diversity in the North Carolina court system, the commission launched an investigation into her statements. According to a federal lawsuit filed by Earls’ lawyers, she has been “subjected to a series of months-long intrusive investigations,” which have led to a “chilling of her first amendment rights”.
In a June article on Law360, Earls pointed out the lack of diversity among North Carolina supreme court law clerks. “If you look at who is hired to serve as clerks to the justices … we have plenty of female clerks, but on racial diversity we’re lacking,” Earls said in the interview, pointing out that there was only one Black clerk and one Latina clerk employed in the court’s latest term.
Earls also said that she had witnessed “implicit bias” in court, telling the publication she witnessed a Black litigator being “attacked unfairly” by Earls’ colleagues. Earls said the court’s racial equity trainings and committees to increase diversity and inclusion had been disbanded.
Earls, North Carolina’s only Black female supreme court justice, alleges that the commission is targeting her ability to critique the court, especially on matters of diversity. “The first amendment provides me and every American the right to free speech, and to bring to light imperfections and unfairness in our political and judicial systems,” Earles said in a statement to the Guardian. “I believe public confidence in the judiciary is best promoted by honestly looking at the facts, not by sweeping the truth under the rug or silencing dissenters.”
On 15 August, the commission told Earls it would be investigating her comments, alleging that the remarks potentially violate ethics rules, specifically a provision that judges act “in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary”.
The commission, which investigates misconduct complaints made against judges, tends to investigate only a small number of the complaints it receives. In 2022, the commission carried out 28 formal investigations from 560 complaints, the Carolina Public Press reported. How the commission decides what to investigate depends on which complaints it finds legitimate and credible – but that process is confidential. The commission may also launch investigations into matters that did not receive a formal complaint but are gaining attention in the media.
This latest investigation is the second against Earls. In March, the commission investigated after an anonymous tipster accused her of dis
closing confidential court matters. The complaint was later dismissed.
Currently, Republican legislators are attempting to change how the 14person commission is appointed, giving themselves more power to choose members. Legislators have also been attempting to remove lawyers from the commission. Judge Wanda Bryant, who served as chair of the commission from 2014 to 2020, told the Guardian that the lawyers play an essential role, bringing broad perspectives on what happens in court. “To remove a group of people that bring more to a commission like this? I don’t understand. It makes no sense,” Bryant said.
In a previous statement, Bryant said amendments to how the commission handles discussions of diversity and appointments were cause for concern: “Some changes, notably what appears to be a difference in how racial and gender issues are handled, are very troubling.
“Furthermore, the proposed legislative appointments to the commission are especially alarming as they serve to politicize and undermine the independence of the judiciary and very possibly result in a chilling effect on the freedom of expression of judges and justices.”
In at least three cases that she consulted on after leaving the commission, Bryant told the Guardian, Black judges were subject to investigations of which she saw no merit. She said: “They seemed to be the kind of cases that when I was chair, we would not move on to a formal investigation because they didn’t seem to be substantive merit to the cases.”
Supporters of Earls have condemned the investigation as an attempt to remove her from the court. Earls is one of only two Democrats on the Republican-leaning court. “What we know is that the [judicial complaint] process is being bastardized in an effort to silence Black and brown people,” Dawn Blagrove, the executive director of Emancipate NC, said to WTVD in North Carolina. “And in this case, particularly, Justice Earls.”
The commission said in a statement to the News and Observer that it could not comment on the lawsuit, as it is an active investigation.