Judges refuse to delay NC primary

A three-judge panel refused Friday to delay North Carolina's May 8 primary elections for legislative and congressional seats, largely because a final ruling on lawsuits filed over the Republican-drawn districts is likely several months away.

The Superior Court judges unanimously rejected a request by Democratic elected officials and civil-rights and election-watchdog groups to postpone those races until July 10 and bar the redistricting maps from being used in this year's elections.

The panel's ruling should not be considered a dismissal on the merits of the arguments made in the lawsuits, Wake Superior Court Judge Paul Ridgeway said after an hour of oral arguments. The allegations of racial gerrymandering are serious and warrant more scrutiny by the panel, he said.

"The court is not persuaded that a delay of the primaries ... will have any meaningful, practical value or materially aid in protecting the rights asserted by the plaintiffs in the course of this litigation," Ridgeway said in open court. The proposed election schedule by those who sued wouldn't leave meaningful time for appellate review or for the legislature to fix maps should they be ruled unconstitutional, he said.

"The court finds and concludes the plaintiffs are not entitled to the injunctive relief they seek," Ridgeway said for the court, which also included Superior Court judges Alma Hinton of Halifax County and Joseph Crosswhite of Iredell County.

Attorneys for the state and legislative leaders argued Friday that the boundaries are legal, a preliminary injunction is not needed and would have created confusion by possibly creating two primary dates — one in May for Council of State races and the proposed constitutional amendment to limit marriage and another in July for the General Assembly and Congress.

Sen. Bob Rucho, R-Mecklenburg and chairman of the Senate Redistricting Committee, said after the hearing that the ruling brings certainty to the election process. Candidate filing is scheduled to begin Feb. 13.

"The reality is the election goes forward, and that is the real big decision today," said Rucho, adding it was still a victory on the lawsuit's merits because the judges didn't find enough evidence to grant the preliminary injunction.

Anita Earls, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, said she doesn't know whether her clients will ask the N.C. Supreme Court to intervene and grant the injunction. Regardless, she said she'll continue to press her case in court.

"Certainly everything we said in the argument this morning still holds true from our point of view and we will do everything we can to document what happens during the elections going forward," Earls said.

David W. Moore, a Kernersville Democrat who had planned to run in the 73rd District before it vanished from Forsyth County during redistricting, said that he expects further clarification before the filing period begins.

"I disagree with the renditions (the GOP) drew," Moore said, complaining in particular that the new maps split Kernersville between two districts. Moore will be living in the 74th District, should it keep the new boundaries drawn by the N.C. General Assembly.

"I will be filing whether it is the 73rd or 74th," Moore said. Two Republicans, Rep. Larry Brown, the incumbent in the old 73rd, and Debra Conrad, a Forsyth County commissioner, are also trying for the 74th.

The consolidated lawsuits contend the GOP-penned maps violate the state and federal constitutions by needlessly bundling black voters in majority-black districts to reduce their political power and splitting hundreds of voting precincts in the process, disproportionately affecting black citizens.

Lawmakers drew N.C. Sen. Linda Garrou, R-Forsyth, out of her existing district, the 32nd, stating that they wanted to improve the chances that the district could elect a black senator. Garrou is among those filing suit. She did not return a phone call Friday.

Earls told the judges Friday that the split precincts will create hundreds of ballot versions in some counties, creating potential confusion and making elections more difficult to administer.

Ridgeway said those who sued raised important questions about the extent to which racial classifications were used in the drawing of the plans by the GOP-led legislature last year.

"Nor would it be correct to interpret this decision as minimizing the harm that can be associated with governmental acts that tend to stigmatize and separate citizens by their color of their skin," Ridgeway said, speaking for the court.

Chief Justice Sarah Parker appointed the panel, as required by state law. While judges are elected in nonpartisan elections, two of the three judges on the panel are registered Democrats. The third judge is a Republican.