Case Summary
Holmes v. Moore was a state court challenge to the legislation implementing North Carolina’s voter ID constitutional amendment, SB 824, which the General Assembly passed during a lame-duck special session in late 2018. On the same day that the General Assembly overrode the Governor’s veto, Southern Coalition for Social Justice filed this lawsuit in Wake County Superior Court on behalf of six individual plaintiffs (Jabari Holmes, Fred Culp, Daniel E. Smith, Brendon Jaden Peay, Shakoya Carrie Brown, and Paul Kearney, Sr.) with co-counsel from Paul Weiss.
After a three week bench trial, the state trial court held that North Carolina's voter ID restriction in SB 824 was enacted with discriminatory intent and had a discriminatory impact on Black voters. In 2022, the North Carolina Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's decision. After the North Carolina changed partisan composition following the 2022 general election, the court reheard and reversed its earlier decision in 2023 in an unprecedented procedural posture, and by changing the standard for proving intentional discrimination to require direct evidence in an upheaval of long established precedent.
Why it's Important
Discriminatory voter ID can prevent historically disenfranchised voters from successfully casting a ballot, and can discourage voters who lack qualifying ID from even attempting to vote. A preliminary injunction successfully prevented implementation of the law for the 2018, 2020, and 2022 elections.
Appellate Court Decision
Order Denying Motion to Refrain from Entering Preliminary Injunction
Dec 2018 Holmes Motion for Preliminary Injunction
North Carolina Supreme Court Strikes Down Voter Photo ID Law as Unconstitutional, Discriminatory
North Carolina Court of Appeals Blocks Voter ID Law in Key Win for Southern Coalition for Social Justice
Plaintiffs in North Carolina Voter ID Lawsuit Seek Documents On Legislative Motivations Behind Challenged Law
Voters Challenge to State Voter ID Moves Forward
New North Carolina Voter ID Law Immediately Challenged by Voters
Other Related Cases
Lackey v. Stinnie
SCSJ and others called on the United States Supreme Court as amici curiae to preserve everyday people’s ability to fight for their civil rights in court, no matter their income or resources.
Read More Lackey v. Stinnie
League of Women Voters et al v. North Carolina
League of Women Voters et al v. North Carolina was a federal court challenge to HB 589, North Carolina’s monster voter suppression law.
Read More League of Women Voters et al v. North Carolina
Republican National Committee v. North Carolina State Board of Elections, et. al.
The Republican National Committee (RNC) and the North Carolina Republican Party filed a complaint on Sept. 12 to stop University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) students from using their digital Mobile One Cards as identification cards to vote in the 2024 election.
Read More Republican National Committee v. North Carolina State Board of Elections, et. al.
