NC judges talk redistricting lawsuit, defining 'fair' elections

RALEIGH, N.C. (WTVD) -- North Carolina judges deciding whether a redistricting lawsuit claiming a state constitutional right to "fair" elections can go to trial questioned Thursday their ability to scrutinize district boundaries that way or to define what "fair" means.

A panel of three trial judges listened to arguments on a motion by Republican legislative leaders to have the lawsuit filed against them by several voters dismissed. The judges did not immediately rule from the bench, but two of them peppered the voters' lead lawyer with questions about what his clients were specifically seeking.

Supporters of the lawsuit argue gerrymandering creates a system that takes away the rights of voters.

The legislators' attorney said the lawsuit was already short-circuited by a 2023 state Supreme Court ruling that found judges lacked authority to declare redistricting maps are illegal partisan gerrymanders.

North Carolina is set to be a key battleground in statewide races as well as the high-stakes presidential race.

But in the races for Congress, only 1 out of 14 seats are expected to be competitive.

SEE ALSO | NC Republican lawmakers seek fall referendum on citizen-only voting

After a court-drawn map in 2022 led to an even 7-7 political split, once lawmakers were given the green light to redraw the map, the new lines had a clear GOP advantage.

While some challenges on partisan or racial grounds have stalled, this lawsuit is tackling the heart of the issue itself, whether gerrymandering violates the constitutional right to a fair election. And a former North Carolina Supreme Court is leading the charge.

"This is about a fair election, do we have a right to fair elections or do we not have a right to fair elections and if we do have a right, is stacking the deck a violation of that right," said Bob Orr.

Orr said he believes stacking the deck is made even easier with data that can hand-pick politics down to the street level.

"What good is a free election if it's not a fair election?" Orr asked. "What good are frequent elections if the results are preordained and the value of the citizens' participation as a voter in electing officials is a done deal before they ever even get to the ballot box?"

Take the previous version of the 13th District - It was once a compact swing district centered on Wake County, but shifting the lines dramatically changed the geography and the district is now solidly Republican, but in doing that created an odd shape.

Jackson Rivers believes having his Wake County neighborhood lumped in with places as far as Person County to the north and Lee County to the south doesn't make sense.

"I mean we're all human beings we're all people but you got to live a different way out there but it's just different needs for different areas of life," Rivers said.

It can be such a confusing process that even politically savvy voters like Nancy Gillespie who's lived in the same home for 30 years says she didn't know she wouldn't be in voting the same district this year.

"Whether it's blue or red, I don't agree with gerrymandering simply to get the politics of an area changed in a way that will elect a certain person to office you know I don't think that's right," she said.

It's why Orr hopes a ruling would mean the next generations of map makers won't abuse the power of the pen.

"I think it would have an impact potentially not just in North Carolina but across the country to end this rigging of the system," Orr said.

A decision on the motion to dismiss could take weeks.

ABC11 reached out to both GOP legislative leaders for comment but did not hear back.

In the meantime, this does not impact the new lines that were drawn. Those will be in place when people vote in November.

It's one of at least four lawsuits filed in North Carolina to challenge boundaries drawn by the GOP-dominated General Assembly last fall for use in elections through 2030 that favor Republicans electorally. Three have been filed in federal court and claim illegal racial gerrymandering. Two of those lawsuits are scheduled for trial next year. A federal appeals court in March sided for now with Republicans in a third lawsuit involving two state Senate districts.

The lawsuit says there is an implicit unwritten right within the state constitution to fair elections, citing specific language in the constitution that "elections shall be often held" and that "all elections shall be free." The state lawsuit wants several congressional and General Assembly districts redrawn, saying they are representative of legislators' efforts to shift lines in otherwise competitive districts to preordain electoral outcomes that will favor one side - which now are Republicans.

Phil Strach, an attorney for the Republican legislative leaders, told the judges that the April 2023 ruling by the state Supreme Court halts lawsuits like those considered Thursday, which he called "legal gobbledygook." Elections in the state already are fair, Strach added.

"The state Supreme Court has slammed the door shut on this court being the eye of the beholder on what is fair or not fair in a redistricting map," Strach said in urging its dismissal. "They have slammed that door shut, and it should stay permanently closed."

RELATED | 5 years after federal suit, North Carolina voter ID trial begins

Superior Court Judge Jeffery Foster of Pitt County asked Orr for a definition of fair. Orr responded that fair means equitable, impartial and something that doesn't favor one side or the other. Foster asked whether it made more sense to simply seek a statewide referendum to amend the state constitution to make plain that elections must be fair. However, referendums can't happen without legislative approval.

Superior Court Judge Angela Puckett of Surry County questioned how fairness would be quantified since Orr said it did not mean that all candidates in every legislative and congressional district had the same chance to win.

"I just don't understand what you are asking for," Puckett asked. Orr, a former Republican candidate for governor who is now an unaffiliated voter, said that redistricting is a complicated process that would require collecting evidence in a trial.

"Give us a chance to make our case," Orr said.

Superior Court Judge Ashley Gore of Columbus County the other panelist along with Foster and Puckett, are all registered Republicans. Chief Justice Paul Newby, a Republican who wrote the prevailing opinion in the 2023 redistricting ruling, chooses three-judge panels to hear such constitutional challenges like these. Last year's ruling by the GOP majority on the Supreme Court reversed a 2022 decision by the state's highest court when it had a Democratic majority.

The Associated Press contributed.