Supreme Court Hands Voting Rights Advocates a Big Win in North Carolina

But it could be a temporary victory.

This photo taken last year shows North Carolina's voter ID rules posted at a voting station in Greensboro.Andrew Krech/News & Record via AP

The Supreme Court handed voting rights advocates a big—if temporary—victory on Monday morning when it announced that it would not review a massively restrictive North Carolina voting law. That means that a stinging 4th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that struck down the law will remain in place.

The law, enacted shortly after the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, imposed stringent voter ID requirements, shortened early voting by a week, and prohibited out-of-precinct voting. The 4th Circuit’s ruling last summer has been widely cited for its scorching language about the law, calling it “the most restrictive voting law North Carolina has seen since the era of Jim Crow,” which targeted “African Americans with almost surgical precision.” If the Supreme Court had agreed to review the lower court’s ruling, the court’s conservative majority might have upheld the law.

Generally, if the Supreme Court doesn’t take a case, it means the justices are satisfied with the lower court’s ruling. But this case might be different. After the 4th Circuit ruled, the state’s Republican governor appealed the decision to the Supreme Court. But after that governor, Pat McCrory, lost his reelection bid in November 2016 to Democrat Roy Cooper, the Cooper administration attempted to withdraw the appeal filed by his predecessor. Chief Justice John Roberts indicated Monday that it might be the confusion over the appeal to the Supreme Court, rather than the merits of the case, that ultimately led the court not to take it up. “Given the blizzard of filings over who is and who is not authorized to seek review in this Court under North Carolina law, it is important to recall our frequent admonition that ‘[t]he denial of a writ of certiorari imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case,'” Roberts wrote.

That’s cold comfort for voting rights advocates who worry that the Supreme Court will ultimately uphold a strict voter ID law like North Carolina’s. Still, they’re expressing relief that the 4th Circuit’s opinion will stand. The law “is meeting its much-deserved demise,” Dale Ho, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, said in a statement. “An ugly chapter in voter suppression is finally closing.”

One More Thing

And it's a big one. Mother Jones is launching a new Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on the corruption that is both the cause and result of the crisis in our democracy.

The more we thought about how Mother Jones can have the most impact right now, the more we realized that so many stories come down to corruption: People with wealth and power putting their interests first—and often getting away with it.

Our goal is to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We're aiming to create a reporting position dedicated to uncovering corruption, build a team, and let them investigate for a year—publishing our stories in a concerted window: a special issue of our magazine, video and podcast series, and a dedicated online portal so they don't get lost in the daily deluge of headlines and breaking news.

We want to go all in, and we've got seed funding to get started—but we're looking to raise $500,000 in donations this spring so we can go even bigger. You can read about why we think this project is what the moment demands and what we hope to accomplish—and if you like how it sounds, please help us go big with a tax-deductible donation today.

We Recommend


Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.


Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.