THE CASH STUFF FOR THURSDAY, NOV. 21, 2019

STATE NEWS BRIEFS FOR 11-21-19

CHATHAM COUNTY CONFEDERATE STATUE TAKEN DOWN 

[PITTSBORO] After 112 years,  the controversial bronze Confederate statute in downtown Pittsboro has been removed after weeks of bitter demonstrations, and even confrontations, yielding several arrests. The monument was taken down by work crews in the middle of the night Wednesday morning when traffic was light. Published reports said about 75  “…onlookers applauded and cheered.” A Superior Court judge lifted an injunction allowing county officials to remove the statue.

NC SUPREME COURT DECLINES TO REVIEW NEW STATE MAPS

[RALEIGH] The NC Supreme Court last week declined to review newly redrawn redistricting maps proposed to govern the 2020 elections, even though plaintiffs charged that at lease eight districts were will partisan gerrymanders. So now, this maps will be used in state elections in 2020. The three-judge panel that initially ordered a redrawing after finding the original maps to be partisan gerrymanders, approved the new maps, but plaintiffs appealed to the state Supreme Court, which declined to rule. Candidates can now begin filing for state office as of December 2nd.

SHAW UNIVERSITY MAY SOON BEGIN SELLING OFF PROPERTIES

[RALEIGH’ The Triangle Business Journal is reporting that Shaw University may soon begin selling off “non-core” properties in downtown Raleigh in order to raise more much-needed revenues to avert another “financial crisis” and “survive, stabilize and thrive.”  A special panel of experts from the Urban Land Institute recently recommended that the HBCU sell all “non-strategic” real estate assets to order to “…fund a plan for revitalization and sustainable growth.”

According to the panel, because Shaw is constantly in a state of fiscal crisis, in addition to having to maintain a crumbling physical plant, if it doesn’t address the situation by creating a vital revenue stream, it could “..cease to exist.” It needs to raise 410 million in the next six months.

-30-

                               FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER

HOLDER, OBAMA GROUP

JOIN CHALLENGE TO NEW 

NC CONGRESSIONAL MAP

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

No sooner had both houses of the NC General Assembly last week voted to approve a new remedial Congressional redistricting map at the urging of a three-judge panel, did a national group led by former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and former Pres. Barack Obama,  jump into the fray, “…supporting a group of individual plaintiffs …who are challenging the partisan gerrymandering of the state’s 2016 congressional map. The suit seeks to establish a new, fair map for use in the 2020 elections.”

The National Redistricting Foundation is supporting lawsuits against Republican legislatures across the South, including North Carolina, where plaintiffs charge African Americans and Democrats were cheated by extreme partisan gerrymandering, even to the point, in some cases, of violating the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

“The congressional map passed by Republicans in the North Carolina legislature simply replaces one partisan gerrymander with a new one. This new map fails to respond to the court’s order by continuing to split communities of interest, packing voters in urban areas, and manipulating the district lines to provide Republicans with an unfair partisan advantage,” said Holder.

The 2016 Congressional map drawn by Republicans created ten GOP congressional districts and three Democratic districts. They were challenged in Wake County Superior Court, yielding an order to redraw the maps.

The new maps approved last week would now change the configuration to eight Republican districts and five Democratic districts, if approved by the three-judge panel. 

But the new maps were instantly challenged on Nov. 15th, and all parties involved ordered to file motions for summary judgement then, with arguments scheduled to be heard on December 2, the same day that official filing for the March 2020 primaries are to begin.

-30-

NC NAACP PETITIONS COURT

TO STOP VOTER ID LAW

BEFORE 2020 ELECTIONS

The NC NAACP has gone back to federal court in a motion filed November 15th, defending it’s original motion for a preliminary injunction against Senate Bill 824 - AN ACT TO IMPLEMENT THE CONSTITUTIONAL  AMENDMENT  REQUIRING  PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION TO VOTE. 

The goal - to ultimately stop implementation the law before the March 2020 NC primaries, and the November 2020 elections.

In the motion filed against Governor Roy Cooper (but directed primarily at Republican legislative leaders in the NC General Assembly) in the US District Court for the Middle District, the state NAACP called SB824,  “the product of racially discriminatory intent by the majority party in the North Carolina General Assembly, which sought too preserve its legislative advantage by deterring Black and Latino voters , who tend to support the other party, from voting….” the motion contends.

“The record further demonstrates that Blacks and Latinos disproportionately lack the photo identification needed to vote under 824

And that the law therefore imposes additional and unnecessary burdens that both hinder and prevents them from casting ballots,” the NCNAACP motion for preliminary injunction continued.

“For these reasons, SB824 violates both the [1965] Voting Rights Act  and the [U.S.] Constitution.”

The motion counters defendants’ arguments for justifying the voter ID law, which was authorized in 2018 when North Carolina voters passed a constitutional amendment requiring that a such a measure be passed.

“Defendants speculate that the availability of free ID cards and the Reasonable Impediment Declaration (“RID”) eliminate the demonstrable disparate impact that SB824 imposes on Black and Latino voters.”

The NCNAACP, however, says that evidence shows that such actions “…would not have any material impact on the disparate numbers of Black and Latino voters who lack qualifying ID….and critically, add to the burdens minority voters face in casting their ballots, thereby abridging their right to vote in that manner.”

“For the reasons set forth above….,” the motion states at it’s conclusion, “… Plaintiffs request that this Court enter a preliminary injunction against the implementation of the provisions of SB 824 that impose voter-identification requirements, that expand the number of poll observers, and that loosen eligibility requirement for people who can challenge ballots in the March 2020 elections pending the outcome of a trial on the merits of plaintiffs’ claims.”

-30-