Case Summary
On appeal, NAACP v. McCrory
In 2013, Southern Coalition for Social Justice and co-counsel from the ACLU challenged provisions of North Carolina's monster voter suppression law, HB 589, on behalf of the League of Women Voters of North Carolina, the North Carolina A. Philip Randolph Institute, Unifour OneStop Collaborative, Common Cause North Carolina, and five individual voters (Hugh Stohler, Sara Stohler, Octavia Rainey, Kay Brandon, and Goldie Wells). HB 589 imposed a strict voter ID requirement that excluded college and out-of-state IDs, ended same-day registration, and prohibited "out-of-precinct" voting, eliminated a week of early voting, including eliminating one of two "Souls to the Polls" Sundays, and expanded the ability of poll observers to challenge voters' eligibility. In their complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, Plaintiffs alleged HB 589 violated the Equal Protections Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Voting Rights Act.
On July 29, 2016, the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a trial court judgment to find HB 589 was enacted with discriminatory intent in violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. The Court held the North Carolina General Assembly targeted Black voters with "almost surgical precision" with provisions that were both "inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist."
Why it's Important
The success of this case meant that voters in the 2016 general election were not required to have a DMV-issued photo ID, which voters of color disproportionately lack. In addition, voters had access to same-day registration and more days of early voting, and were able to cast a provisional ballot outside of their resident districts as long as they voted in the correct county, options that historically have been disproportionately utilized by voters of color.
