5 years after federal suit, North Carolina voter ID trial set to begin

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A federal lawsuit challenging North Carolina’s photo voter identification law is set to go to trial Monday, with arguments expected to focus on whether the requirement unlawfully discriminates against Black and Hispanic citizens or serves legitimate state interests to boost public confidence in elections.

The non-jury trial in Winston-Salem begins more than five years after the state NAACP and several local chapters sued over the voter ID law enacted by the Republican-dominated General Assembly in late 2018.

This litigation, along with similar lawsuits in state courts, delayed implementation of the requirement until last year’s municipal elections. The 1.8 million voters who cast ballots in the March primaries also had to comply. State election data showed fewer than 500 provisional ballots cast because of ID-related issues in the primary ultimately didn’t count.

The November general election — with races for president, governor and other statewide seats — could see turnout three times greater than the primary. And the nation’s ninth-largest state is a presidential battleground where statewide races are often close.

A favorable NAACP ruling from U.S. District Judge Loretta Biggs could block the requirement in the fall. The trial is expected to last several days, with Biggs already signaling in a document that she won’t immediately rule from the bench.

The NAACP lawyers contend the voter ID requirement, along with two other voting-related provisions in the 2018 law, violate the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act in part because lawmakers enacted them with discriminatory intent.

A few years ago, my employer was offered about $900 by a local nonprofit if she would come in at night, twice a week, and do taxes for free for low income people at two different community centers. She said yes and asked if I would come help, so I said yes. She said she would give me the money. We did it for about 5-6 weeks on Tuesday and Thursday nights and yes, the community centers were in the bad parts of town with a predominantly minority population.

The nonprofit assigned me the task of greeting people and checking them in, which included making sure they had a photo id, social security card, and any other necessary documents.

Not one single person batted an eye or protested when I politely asked for a photo id. Not a one. If they didn’t have it on them, they asked if they could go get it and come back. No one said it was racist or discriminatory.

This hardship/discrimination crap sounds like the usual garbage spewed by the agitating activists for purposes of continuing to push the victimhood narrative.

But it definitely doesn’t help when citizens (whether minority or not) see illegals not being required to have any sort of id but who receive all kinds of benefits.

The ending to the free tax story: After we spent 8 hours a week for 5-6 weeks of work for the nonprofit, they instead took all the volunteers to a Japanese steakhouse lunch, gave out little awards, and told my employer they didn’t remember promising her any money. Oh and while we were doing the work, a couple of the supervisors also tried to get my employer to occasionally overlook missing documents to push through people’s taxes. The argument was, “They need their money.” My employer’s response was, “I don’t commit tax fraud.”

Peach

Carrying this to the next logical step, any voter that may cause leftists, blacks, LGTBQ, to be voted out of office, shows intent to harm the same.

If your vote is cast with biased intent, you are violating federal election law?

IOW, Any voter that chooses to vote for a candidate that they prefer over another because of preference of political opinions, shows harmful intent in an election.

Jeeze.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.