TYB
—
Supreme Court to hear dispute over North Carolina voter ID law
Summary
In a surprise pre-Thanksgiving order, the Supreme Court on Wednesday added one new case to its merits docket for the 2021-22 term. In Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, the justices will weigh in on an effort by Republican legislators in the state to intervene to defend the state’s voter-ID law.
The case does not directly concern the lawfulness of the requirement, but rather deals with which government bodies can defend the law against legal challenges.
—
Story
Top Republican lawmakers in North Carolina who back the measure are seeking to intervene in defense of its constitutionality, despite the fact that the state’s attorney general, a Democrat, has already taken that position in state and federal court. Still, GOP legislative leaders contend that they too have a right to represent the state’s interest in defending the law — a claim the lower courts found unconvincing, prompting the lawmakers’ appeal to the Supreme Court.
“This is a fairly common problem we see today where a state executive (governor and/or attorney general) is a Democrat and the state legislature is controlled by Republicans, and there’s a dispute over who gets to speak for the state,” Rick Hasen, a professor at University of California, Irvine School of Law, wrote on the Election Law Blog.
The North Carolina legislature passed the state’s voter ID law in December 2018 after overriding the Democratic governor’s veto.
The law, S.B. 824, with only limited exceptions requires in-person and absentee voters to present one of 10 recognized forms of photo identification. The measure drew a swift legal challenge from the North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and several of its affiliates.
The challengers allege that the photo ID requirement, along with provisions of the law that expand the number of poll watchers and make it easier to challenge ballots, pose a disproportionate impact on minority voters in violation of legal protections.
The case, Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, has not yet been scheduled for argument
—
At Issue:
(1) Whether a state agent authorized by state law to defend the state’s interest in litigation must overcome a presumption of adequate representation to intervene as of right in a case in which a state official is a defendant;
(2) whether a district court’s determination of adequate representation in ruling on a motion to intervene as of right is reviewed de novo or for abuse of discretion; and
(3) whether petitioners Philip Berger, the president pro tempore of the state senate, and Timothy Moore, the speaker of the state house of representatives, are entitled to intervene as of right in this litigation.
—
Sources
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/583009-supreme-court-to-hear-dispute-over-north-carolina-voter-id-law
https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/11/court-will-consider-effort-by-north-carolina-legislators-to-intervene-to-defend-state-voter-id-law/
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/berger-v-north-carolina-state-conference-of-the-naacp/