logo logo
Donate
    • Membership
    • Donate
  • Social Justice
    • Racial Justice
    • Climate Justice
    • Disability Justice
    • Economic Justice
    • Food Justice
    • Health Justice
    • Immigration
    • LGBTQ+
  • Civic News
  • Nonprofit Leadership
    • Board Governance
    • Equity-Centered Management
    • Finances
    • Fundraising
    • Human Resources
    • Organizational Culture
    • Philanthropy
    • Power Dynamics
    • Strategic Planning
    • Technology
  • Columns
    • Ask Rhea!
    • Ask a Nonprofit Expert
    • Gathering in Support of Democracy
    • Humans of Nonprofits
    • The Impact Algorithm
    • Living the Question
    • Nonprofit Hiring Trends & Tactics
    • Notes from the Frontlines
    • Parables of Earth
    • Reimagining Philanthropy
    • State of the Movements
    • We Stood Up
    • The Unexpected Value of Volunteers
  • CONTENT TYPES
  • Leading Edge Membership
  • Newsletters
  • Webinars

Will the Future of Voting Rights Be Decided in North Carolina?

Carole Levine
September 4, 2018
See page for author [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

August 28, 2018; New York Times and Washington Post

North Carolina has become the poster child for gerrymandering cases that push the envelope. On Monday, August 27th, a three-judge federal panel ruled that the current congressional district map for North Carolina was unconstitutionally drawn to favor Republicans over Democrats and may need to be redrawn before the November elections. This follows a Supreme Court ruling NPQ wrote about in May 2017, in which North Carolina used race as a factor in drawing two of its congressional districts. The court ruled that these districts must be redrawn.

Now, in a state where Republicans currently hold 10 of the state’s 13 House seats in spite of vote totals that are about even, the federal judicial panel declared that something was awry. While the Republicans argued that the Democrats who brought the case did not have standing, the judges did not agree.

Judge James A. Wynn Jr. of the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, writing Monday for a special three-judge district court panel, said plaintiffs did have standing under the decision in Wisconsin’s Gill v. Whitford, which he said reinforced the judges’ earlier views that the congressional districts were drawn with improper partisan goals.

He said the court was leaning against giving the North Carolina legislature another chance to draw the congressional districts.

“We continue to lament that North Carolina voters now have been deprived of a constitutional congressional districting plan—and, therefore, constitutional representation in Congress—for six years and three election cycles,” Wynn wrote. “To the extent allowing the General Assembly another opportunity to draw a remedial plan would further delay electing representatives under a constitutional districting plan, that delay weighs heavily against giving the General Assembly another such opportunity.”

He proposed several unusual ideas: appointing a special master to draw new districts, holding general elections without party primaries or even turning the November elections into a primary and holding the general election sometime before the new Congress convenes in January.

Sign up for our free newsletters

Subscribe to NPQ's newsletters to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

Clearly, time is of the essence in this. The North Carolina Republican party indicates it will ask the Supreme Court for a stay, which, if granted, would mean the midterm elections would be conducted under the partisan map that was just ruled unconstitutional. But there are issues with taking this case to the Supreme Court at this time: The Kennedy vacancy is not yet filled; five votes are required for a stay; the Senate vote on Kavanaugh (an anticipated 5th vote) isn’t expected until the end of September; and ballots need to be mailed to military voters and others before then.

Recognizing the timing dilemma, Justice Wynn requested briefs from both sides with their responses to his options by August 31st. Given the state of technology, the possibility of a new, nonpartisan map being drawn quickly is not so farfetched.

As a practical matter, two experts said on Tuesday, drawing a new House map for North Carolina would take less than a day’s work on a laptop. In a Pennsylvania gerrymandering case decided by that state’s supreme court in January, “our experts produced thousands in a few minutes that all complied with traditional redistricting criteria,” said Mimi McKenzie, the legal director of the Public Interest Law Center in Philadelphia, which won the case.

In the midst of the chaos of North Carolina politics, what may be missing to make this happen is the political will. But there is more at stake here than just the state politics of North Carolina. The entire House of Representatives is in play. And if control of the House shifts from Republican to Democrat, it could hinge on the mapping of districts in North Carolina. So, the eyes and ears of both parties are focused on how this will play out.

In the meantime, chaos rules. Political candidates are unsure of where their districts are or might be. Voters are unsure if they will be having another primary in November with newly drawn districts—one of the options—or voting in the partisan districts that existed before.

State politicians openly admit partisan bias. “I think electing Republicans is better than electing Democrats,” said Rep. David Lewis, a Republican member of the North Carolina General Assembly, addressing fellow legislators when they passed the plan in 2016. “So, I drew this map to help foster what I think is better for the country.”

For those who care about voting rights, much more is entwined. The value of a person’s vote is reflected in the ability to elect people who share their views to leadership positions. When that ability is diminished, whether based on politics or race, it discourages voting. North Carolina shows how gerrymandering can limit those who do not align with one party from having full representation. Given the timing and the possible partisan leanings of our courts, our future voting rights could hang in the balance.—Carole Levine

Our Voices Are Our Power.

Journalism, nonprofits, and multiracial democracy are under attack. At NPQ, we fight back by sharing stories and essential insights from nonprofit leaders and workers—and we pay every contributor.

Can you help us protect nonprofit voices?

Your support keeps truth alive when it matters most.
Every single dollar makes a difference.

Donate now
logo logo logo logo logo
About the author
Carole Levine

Carole Levine is a principal consultant at Levine Partners, providing consulting services to small and medium-sized nonprofit organizations. She has held senior management positions in four national nonprofits: The National PTA (Deputy Executive Director); Communities in Schools (Vice President of Expansion and Technical Assistance); The Family Resource Coalition (Director of Technical Assistance); and National Lekotek Center (Director of Development). Carole holds a BA in education and political science from Washington University, and an M.Ed. in Early Childhood Leadership and Advocacy from National Louis University. Carole has served on the boards of numerous organizations, holding national positions on the board of National Council of Jewish Women and on the International Council of Jewish Women. She is currently the Chair of Courts Matter Illinois, serves on the board of Chicago Women Take Action and is active on the Promote the Vote Illinois Coalition. Carole is passionate about purposeful work, justice for all, advocacy and her family (which includes 6 amazing grandchildren!).

More about: Nonprofit NewsPolicyPoliticsVoting Rights
See comments

You might also like
Hope in the Dark: Four Tests for the Pro-Democracy Movement in 2026
Joe Goldman
What Is the SAVE America Act?
Marissa Martinez
The Ellisons’ Empire: Media Consolidation, Narrative Control, and the Threat to Democracy
Coty Poynter
Disability Groups Are Standing United for Trans Rights. That Hasn’t Always Been the Case.
Sara Luterman
New Student Loan Limits Could Threaten Diversity in Nursing and Public Health Programs
Lauren Nuttall
The 2026 Election Could Be a Game Changer—Advocates Are Prepared to Fight
Rebekah Barber

Upcoming Webinars

Group Created with Sketch.
April 23, 2:00 pm ET

Receiving & Giving Feedback

Essential Practices for Healthy Organizations and Communities

Register
Group Created with Sketch.
May 14, 2:00 pm ET

Equitable Compensation in Practice

A New Values-Aligned Toolkit & Discussion Guide

Register

    
You might also like
The intertwining roots of a mangrove, standing tall, and broad in their reinforced strength.
Hope in the Dark: Four Tests for the Pro-Democracy Movement...
Joe Goldman
A crowd of people hold signs that read "Stop the SAVE Act", "End Voter Suppression" and "Defend Our Democracy"
What Is the SAVE America Act?
Marissa Martinez
A man in a business suit with a television for a head, his arms and legs are being controlled by puppet strings.
The Ellisons’ Empire: Media Consolidation, Narrative...
Coty Poynter

Like what you see?

Subscribe to the NPQ newsletter to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

See our newsletters

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright
  • Donate
  • Editorial Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Funders
  • Submissions

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

 

Nonprofit Quarterly | Civic News. Empowering Nonprofits. Advancing Justice.
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.