The Supreme Court of North Carolina isn’t wasting any time in getting back to work after the 2018 elections. As Matt wrote last week, after the election, the Court cancelled oral arguments that had been previously scheduled for December, a common practice when an incumbent is leaving the Court. One of the affected cases was Dickson v. Rucho, the North Carolina gerrymandering case that has been winding its way through the State and Federal Court systems since 2011.… Continue Reading
Twice this week the Fourth Circuit took the relatively unusual step of issuing published opinions on orders denying rehearing of a case. Ordinarily such orders are not published for the simple reason that there is no accompanying written opinion to publish. Not so this week, however.
On Monday the Court denied a request for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc in US v.… Continue Reading
While we normally focus on procedural issues in North Carolina appellate law, a trio of recently decided United States Supreme Court cases arising out of North Carolina affect everyone living in this state. So in a departure from the norm, what follows is an analysis of these cases and how they will impact both the present and future of electoral districts in the Tar Heel state.… Continue Reading
As previously blogged about here, here, here, and here, the North Carolina General Assembly recently passed a bill that would reduce the number of seats on the North Carolina Court of Appeals from 15 to 12. Now the constitutionality of the bill is being challenged in court by North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper, who had vetoed the bill but then saw that veto overridden by the General Assembly. … Continue Reading
A few months ago, Carrie blogged about the dismissal of the State’s appeal by the Court of Appeals in North Carolina State Board of Education v. State of North Carolina & North Carolina Rules Review Commission. A substantial development occurred in this case in the Supreme Court on Thursday.
As discussed previously, the General Assembly amended section 7A-27 and other statutes to provide special trial and appeal pathways for facial constitutional challenges to a statute: 1) initial review by a three-judge panel, and 2) direct appeal to the Supreme Court if a law is declared facially invalid. … Continue Reading
Mark your calendars: Justice Edmunds, Associate Justice on our Supreme Court, will face a primary challenge after all–on June 7.
Last June, the governor signed a bill that allows sitting Supreme Court Justices to participate in a retention election in lieu of a contested election. An attorney filed suit in November, arguing that the retention election law is unconstitutional. The case was heard before a three-judge panel in Wake County because it posed a facial challenge to the retention election law. … Continue Reading