Election Results
Over 3.7 million North Carolinians voted in the 2022 General Election — more than half of them voted during one-stop early voting. If you voted in this year’s election, we thank you for making your voice heard and helping us protect civil rights and liberties at the ballot box.
Unfortunately, not all voters were heard during this election because voting rights are not universally guaranteed nor protected in North Carolina. Voters of color continue to face disenfranchisement, intimidation, and limited poll access. This year, we achieved a monumental victory in unlocking the vote for more than 55,000 North Carolinians who were previously incarcerated. The work is not done, and we will continue to push for voting rights on the state and local level so that our democracy takes into account every vote.
While there remains a supermajority in the N.C. Senate, the Republican majority needed 72 seats in the House to achieve a supermajority in that chamber. They secured 71 seats — one seat short. We will have to employ all of our available resources to maintain Governor Cooper’s veto in the 2023 session. The ability to sustain the gubernatorial veto will depend on each Democrat in the House voting together.
Like the governor’s veto power, the state Supreme Court is a vital check on our state legislature. Now that the same party controls both the state legislature and the state Supreme Court, the checks and balances we rely on to ensure fair and equal democracy may be under threat. Our state’s judicial branch should not be beholden to partisan interest and will continue to advocate for fair courts and a fair democracy.
Our predictions for the 2023 legislative session, which is scheduled to begin in January, have not changed much in the wake of the election results (you can read an update to our predictions here). In many ways, we are in a similar position as last session, and we expect to see similar fights. We remain persistent, steadfast, and vigilant in protecting our rights and we are glad you are with us.
Brandon Hill and Death Disqualification
In our newsletter, we shared about Brandon Hill’s experience contending that his capital jury was not representative of his peers, due to “death disqualification,” a practice that ensures that those selected to serve on capital juries are in favor of the death penalty. In practice, this leads to an exclusion of Black people, especially Black women, and people of faith from capital juries and robs defendants of representative and fair juries.
During closing arguments, ACLU attorney Henderson Hill explained that “the denial of the franchise of the African-American community from the jury box is a persistent problem. And it’s a painful problem.”
Now that closing arguments have concluded, we await Superior Court Judge Paul Ridgeway’s decision on the motion.
As we have seen, the exclusion of Black people from the vote is an unfortunate marker of U.S. history, and a threat to our democracy — this is as true for juries as it is for our elections. We will continue to fight for a representative and inclusive democracy for our communities.
Moore v. Harper
At 10am on December 7th, the Supreme Court of the United States heard arguments for Moore v. Harper, a case emerging from our state. At stake in this case is congressional mapping, the weight of our votes, and state checks and balances to ensure fair state elections.
In preparation for oral arguments, the ACLU published a blog post from our Legal Director Kristi Graunke and Ari Savitzky, Senior Staff Attorney for the ACLU Voting Rights Project articulating what’s at stake in the case. The post argues:
“Legislatures cannot ignore the constitutions to which they owe their very existence. They cannot act outside the law, without any checks and balances. Yet that is what the North Carolina legislators are asking the Supreme Court to give them — the power to set rules for voting and elections without state constitutional limits enforced by state courts.”
During arguments, Justice Elena Kagan said that the case, which relies on the “independent state legislature” theory, would have “big consequences.”
She continued, “I think what might strike a person is that this is a proposal that gets rid of the normal checks and balances on the way big governmental decisions are made in this country…You might think it gets rid of all those checks and balances at exactly the time when they are needed most."
If Moore succeeds, or if SCOTUS rules that the state legislature’s gerrymandered map is constitutional, it will hand state legislators the power to manipulate our elections and undermine our votes. State courts and governors could not stop them. In addition to rigged and gerrymandered voting maps, this decision could upend early voting and vote-by-mail options. It could also effect voter protections against intimidation, and discriminatory barriers to voting access that will disproportionately affect Black, Brown, elderly, and/or disabled voters.
Decisions are reached within 90 days of oral arguments. Stay posted for this decision that will have a tremendous impact on our democracy.