Monday, February 28, 2022




                                                                     U.S. Supreme Court





By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

What does how Alabama redistricted its Black voters have to do with how North Carolina Republicans redistricted ours?

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court surprised many by putting on hold a lower federal court ruling that Alabama should have two congressional districts where African-Americans can elect a candidate of their choice, instead of the one that was originally drawn.

By overruling the lower federal court, many believe the U.S. Supreme Court kicked dirt onto the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and will do so again.

North Carolina Republican legislative leaders applauded that U.S. Supreme Court ruling as giving them hope in their current battle with the Democrat-led NC Supreme Court, with NC House Speaker Tim Moore saying that it “emboldened our case.”

And that’s why state Republicans have now gone to the 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court to overrule the state Democratic Supreme Court majority.

On February 25th, state Republican legislative leaders formally asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the NC High Court’s 4-3 ruling that struck down the GOP-led NC legislature’s partisan legislative and congressional voting maps as unconstitutional. In their emergency filing, Republican leaders also asked that a new congressional map drawn under the auspices of a Republican majority lower court’s special masters be blocked while their appeal is being considered. 

The three-judge lower court accepted the legislature’s redrawn legislative maps as meeting the fairness standards set by the Democratic majority of the NC Supreme Court, along with it’s newly redrawn special masters congressional map.

Candidate filing was resumed February 24th under those new maps for the May 17th primaries.

But in their emergency petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, Republicans made it clear that under the U.S. Constitution, only the state legislature is empowered to make redistricting decisions, not the state courts. The NC Supreme Court and lower court were undermining the state legislature’s authority, Republicans claimed.

The Republicans wanedt their original maps, the ones opponents claim undermine, if not eliminate, several Black Democrat incumbents , reinstalled immediately so that the May 17, 2022 primaries can commence, and the November 2022 elections can be conducted.

Democrats, obviously, don’t want that.

Chief Justice John Roberts asked the Democrat plaintiffs in the lawsuit to respond by Wednesday to the Republican request.

So Speaker Moore and other GOP leaders are very hopeful that, based on the Alabama redistricting case, the conservative-leaning U.S. Supreme Court will rule their way.

At least one African-American legal expert is leery that they might, even though in 2019, the Supreme Court backed out of a North Carolina partisan redistricting case, saying that federal courts have no role, only state courts.

Typically, the US Supreme Court can’t over-rule a State decision which is based solely on state law as was this NC redistricting decision, but you never know what this new conservative Court will do,” says NCCU Law Professor Irv Joyner. “These are not normal times and formerly accepted rules are being challenged and changed. All of this will mean more litigation and scheming by the General Assembly leaders.”

Submit a case where racial gerrymandering is alleged, and the federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, will deal with. But allege partisan gerrymandering, and federal courts are supposed to toss it back to the state courts per a June, 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision. So the question is, will this 6-3 conservative U.S. Supreme Court follow its own rule?

Republicans certainly hope not.


                                                     JUDGE KETANJI BROWN JACKSON





By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

President Joe Biden has kept one of his biggest campaign promises, and some Republicans want him to regret it.

On February 25th, Pres. Biden announced his African-American female choice for the U.S. Supreme Court. He formally nominated 51-year-old Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the nation’s highest court, replacing the outgoing liberal Associate Justice Stephen Breyer.

Breyer, 83, announced that he will retire from the nine-member court this summer.

If confirmed by the U.S. Senate, Judge Jackson, a Washington, D.C. native who  currently serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, will become the first African-American woman in the 233-year history of the High Court to serve.

But her nomination has to pass muster with the Senate Judiciary Committee, and ultimately the U.S. Senate first.

Given that Judge Jackson has already been confirmed by this Senate in June 2021 for her current post, 53-44, with three Republicans - senators Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Lindsay Graham of South Carolina - voting for her , one would expect that there wouldn’t be much problem when new Senate confirmation hearings get underway shortly.

But this is an election year, and national politics have become even more toxic and divisive than ever before. Republicans may not be able to stop Judge Jackson’s confirmation in the Senate, thanks to the 50-50 split with the Democrats, plus the tie-breaker from Vice Pres. Kamala Harris (one Democratic senator is still recovering from a stroke however, and there are hopes that he can recover in time to cast his vote), but some GOP’ers have already begun to try to label Jackson as a “radical liberal” enough to scare off any moderate Republicans, like Sen. Murkowski, who is up for re-election now, from supporting her.

Murkowski has already signaled that she is wavering on her vote.

Sen. Graham has already smeared Judge Jackson saying that she is a product of the “radical left”, even though he voted to confirm her earlier. His choice for confirmation was ignored by Biden, plus Graham is seen as still angry with how Democrats treated Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings several years ago.

Other Republicans, like Sen. Ted Cruz (R- Tx) lambasted Pres. Biden for holding to his pledge to choose a Black woman for the high bench.

"The fact that he's willing to make a promise at the outset, that it must be a Black woman, I gotta say that's offensive,” Cruz said on his podcast. “ You know, Black women are what, 6% of the US population? He's saying to 94% of Americans, 'I don't give a damn about you, you are ineligible.”

Still, some Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, like ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) have pledged to treat Judge Jackson with “respect and civility.’

North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis echoed that sentiment, saying,” I will treat Judge Jackson with fairness and civility, a basic standard of decency that many Democrats appallingly refused to extend to the Supreme Court nominees under the previous administration.”

The U.S. House does not vote on the president’s judicial nominees, But that didn’t stop two of North Carolina’s five congressional Democrats from weighing in.

“Ketanji Brown Jackson is an eminent legal mind, a respected jurist a trailblazer and a supremely qualified pick for our highest court,” said Rep. Alma Adams (D-NC-12) in a statement. “In addition to her service as both a federal district judge  and now a circuit court judge, her deep insight into criminal justice as a public defender and a member of the U.S. Sentencing Commission is an important asset at this moment in our history.”

And Rep. G. K. Butterfield, himself a former member of the NC Supreme Court, joined those in the progressive movement who staunchly back Judge Jackson.

I am confident Judge Jackson will be a worthy replacement [for Justice Stephen Breyer] to preserve the Supreme Court’s vital role as a defender of our rights and freedoms,” Butterfield said in a statement.

“I look forward to Judge Jackson receiving a fair and swift confirmation process."

Judge Jackson’s confirmation process is expected to continue through March, with a Senate vote in mid to late April. If confirmed, she will take her place on a court where conservative justices outnumber liberals, 6-3.



Monday, February 21, 2022




By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

As the Federal Bureau of Investigation continues its investigation into several bomb threats called into various HBCUs in North Carolina and across the nation, the latest being at Fayetteville State University just last week, local authorities, as well as the FBI, have been probing a number of threats that have preceded the HBCU cases at public schools systems in North Carolina and beyond.

One educator called the disturbing instances “learning while Black,” and suggested that they are the result of very unbalanced minds trying to intimidate Black progress.

For instance, African-American families of students attending East Wake High School near Raleigh were upset when a racist threat targeting their children appeared online last week. The threat used the N-word twice, ending with “..we will discuss how to get rid of all blacks at East Wake.”

Extra security has been posted at the school while authorities investigate.

Last December, schools in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Iredell-Statesville areas reported threats after a viral Tik-Tok challenge urged students to call in threats of violence, causing at least 25% of students being absent at one point.

On Dec. 17th, the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security had to try to quell fears saying that it didn’t have  “…any information indicating any specific, credible threats to schools but recommends communities remain alert.”

Authorities say many of those threats continued into 2022 with Charlotte police officers sent to a local middle school just last week. 

  In High Point last September, an 18-year-old African-American student was arrested for allegedly posting on Snapchat a “mass violence” threat against Guilford County Public schools. The post displayed several firearms, but after investigating, local authorities deemed the student had no weapons.

October saw Asheville Police investigating threats against a local school on social media. They determined that the threat was not credible, but still took precautionary measures to ensure safety.

The Orange County Public School Board considered a resolution opposing “incidents of hostile and racist behaviors” after rowdy speakers spoke out against the teaching of Critical Race Theory (CRT), and members of the white nationalist Proud Boys group - which authorities say were involved in the January 6th riots at the U.S. Capitol over a year ago, showed up.

In November, members of the  Proud Boys group also showed up at a New Hanover County Public School Board meeting. The visit was apparently in support of angry white parents who also opposed any teaching of CRT, even though CRT is only taught on the college level, not secondary public schools.

The incident was one of many across the state where so-called “anti-government” protesters have been showing up at local school board meetings, opposed to the teaching of  CRT,  and COVID-19 mask mandates, being not only loud but violent.

That forced state education leaders to issue the following statement in part:

“ As educators, as parents and a concerned citizens, we respect the rights of our fellow citizens to share their concerns and voice their opinions. However, this must be done without the use of intimidation or intentionally inspiring fear. Every one of us has a responsibility to instill in our children their First Amendment rights and responsibilities, but we have an even greater responsibility to model good behavior while doing so.”

Last October, U.S. Attorney General Derrick Garland issued a statement that he would have the FBI investigate “…the “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.”






By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

The COVID-19 crisis is not over, and yet, as the pandemic enters its third year, mask mandates imposed by local school boards are quickly being recalled, or at the very least, being made optional.

But is this a good thing, especially in public schools where African-American students are more than likely be in the majority, and a new sub variant of Omicron quickly spreading?

A week ago, Gov. Roy Cooper, like many other governors across the nation in recent days,  announced that because of North Carolina’s  improved vaccination rate, expanded testing and falling number of new COVID-19 cases, he was calling on area school boards and local municipalities to drop their mask mandates.

In concert, the NC General Assembly last week passed the Free the Smiles Act, giving parents the legal right not to have their children wear protective masks in school.

Republican legislative leaders hailed passage of the new law, saying that the state’s “youngest students are suffering under these mask mandates” and that ‘the social and emotional damage of [wearing masks] will not be understood for years…” and that “ some children could be impacted for decades.”

And as if on cue, school boards across the state have been dropping their mask mandates, some reacting to the pressure put on them by parents.

But not everyone agrees that now is the time to lift what little protection children have in school from COVID-19 or its variants before there is more conclusive information.

According to Dr. David L. Hill, an adjunct assistant professor at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, as well as a pediatric hospitalist at Wayne UNC Health Care in Goldsboro, on the Helio Medical website in a February 11th story that he felt, despite the trend of many states to lift their mask mandates, that it may be too soon.

“The trends in COVID-19 transmission are certainly encouraging. But in the vast majority of the country, the total infection and hospitalization rates are still quite high,” Dr. Hill said.

“Public health experts are working to identify criteria based on prevalence in given communities, vaccination rates and the transmissibility of the currently circulating SARS-CoV-2 variant. I would personally love to see us in a place within weeks or months when those indicators tell us that masking is no longer needed, but most experts would agree we’re not quite there yet. In the meantime, I’m just hoping that this newest BA.2 sub variant of Omicron doesn’t put us right in the middle of yet another wave.”

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, “The Omicron variant is a variant of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. The B.A. 2 sub variant of Omicron is spreading rapidly, accounting for 1 out of every five new COVID-19 cases.”     Dr. Hill urged all school districts “…to keep all their students and faculty as safe s possible as long as necessary.

“We’ve seen significant differences in COVID-19 transmission between schools wit masking an those without. I know I feel better that my children attend schools with masking guidelines.”

Dr. Hill added that he agreed that school boards should consider masking mandates for other respiratory infections, like influenza.


Monday, February 14, 2022



NC Chief Justice PAUL NEWBY



By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

Right on the heels of a very controversial redistricting case where today is the deadline for the Republican-led NC. General Assembly to submit redrawn legislative and congressional voting maps to a lower court after ruling previous maps unconstitutional, the NC Supreme Court Monday heard arguments in yet another voter ID case brought by the NC NAACP.

This challenge is to the legitimacy of the NC legislature itself, and whether, at the time it passed  a 2018 constitutional amendment establishing voter photo identification through voter referendum, which then resulted in a 2018 voter I.D. law, the GOP majority had the legal right to do so since several of the districts that constituted the 2018 NC General Assembly were later deemed to be illegal racial gerrymanders by the federal courts, theoretically making any laws passed by that 2018 legislature null and void.

This challenge also included the establishment of a constitutional cap by public referendum for the state income tax, filed by a different plaintiff.

In addition, The NC NAACP maintains that the 2018 voter ID law was racially biased towards African-Americans.

Republicans dispute that the 2018 voter ID law was racially biased, and that was far as the constitutional amendments were concerned, a majority of  NC voters, not state lawmakers, ratified them , so they should stand.

During oral arguments Monday, Republican justices defended the fact that a majority of voters approved the 2018 voter ID and income tax cap amendments at the polls. Chief Justice Paul Newby, a Republican, called it “The ultimate check.”

NC NAACP attorney Kym Hunter countered that still, an illegal legislature put the voter ID amendment up for referendum.

Because of current litigation, voter photo ID is not in effect for elections in North Carolina.

Depending on what the state Supreme Court decides, the law could be in force for the 2022 elections this coming fall.

Meanwhile, a three-judge lower Superior Court panel is to receive the redrawn NC General Assembly maps today, with the panel deciding by Feb. 23rd whether to accept or reject them, or go with another set of maps.

Republican legislative leaders have also introduced the prospect of appealing the redistricting case to the 6-3 conservative leaning U.S. Supreme Court, though it is doubtful that court would turn around a decision in time for this fall’s 2022 NC general elections.







By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

In the past few weeks, more than twenty bomb threats have been called into historically Black colleges and universities here in North Carolina, and beyond. The FBI says it has identified six “tech-savvy’ minor persons of interest.

Last week in the Washington, D.C. area, two teenage boys were arrested for allegedly calling in bomb threast to seven predominately Black high schools.

At one of them, Douglas Emhoff, husband to Vice President Kamala Harris, had to be hustled off  to safety by the Secret Service.

If there is one thing that most Black observers agree on is that bomb threats, and threats of violence against African-American institutions like schools and churches are an important and relevant part of American history that should be taught.

History has shown that such threats came about because Blacks were demanding full citizenship, equal rights, equal access, and voting rights. Physical threats of violence were the most forceful ways to try and deter those efforts.

But new laws recently passed by Republican-led legislatures here in North Carolina and across the country, virtually prohibit the teaching about the realities of slavery, the 1960s civil rights movement, and other well documented events of African-Americans striving for inclusion.

According to GOP lawmakers, teaching about such things as “systemic racism” may “hurt” the self-esteem of young white students, making them feel “guilty” about historical events they had nothing to do with.

“No student or school employee should be made to feel inferior solely because of the color of their skin or their gender,” said Chairman John Torbett (R-Gaston) of the NC House Education Committee upon recent passage of House Bill 324, which now  outlaws “…the teaching that one race is inherently superior to another, or other related concepts that reduce individuals to their gender or skin color.”

The language of the law might seem to make sense, but if a NC teacher tries to instruct about white supremacy, and a white parent objects because the subject would make their child “feel bad,” that teacher could run afoul of the law in North Carolina.

Today, the only excuse, if there is any, for the recent bomb threats on Black institutions of learning, is to  dissuade young African-Americans from educating themselves as fully as possible so that they can assume their rightful role as full citizens, HBCU leaders say.

“When I thought about young people (making the threats), I’m thinking about people that don’t really understand or appreciate the historicity and the pains to African-Americans in this country, particularly historically Black college and universities,” said Zachary Faison Jr , president of Edwards Waters University in Florida, during a virtual panel discussion sponsored by the Southern Poverty Law Center last week about the recent bomb threats.

If all American students, regardless of color or background, are not taught about the torrid history of racism and white supremacy in the nation’s public schools, it will be lead to their ignorance of the underbelly of American history, not their awareness of it., educators say

North Carolina is thought to have one of the softest laws on the books regarding not teaching about historic systematic racism  per the 1898 Wilmington Race massacre, police brutality against unarmed Black citizens, racial segregation and African-Americans being cheated out of long held properties by greedy white developers.

And yet, it is a fact that many North Carolinians today have no idea about the racial reality of North Carolina’s past.






by Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

There’s one aspect of the COVID-19 pandemic that literally no one talks about until now.

Once the pandemic struck in 2020, prostate cancer screenings and treatments literally stopped. For Black men ages 45 and above in North Carolina, that fact means nothing but bad news.

According to the NC Central Cancer Registry, for every 100,000 Black men in North Carolina, 216 will develop prostate cancer per year, and 48 will die. Black men get the disease earlier in their lives compared to white men, and it tends to be more aggressive.

The American Cancer Society now says that there has been a dramatic increase in prostate cancer cases  in 2021 - a 30% increase, along with an 8% increase for 2022 thus far.  Case estimates for this year are 9,560 more which is the seventh highest of all 50 states. Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths for Black in in the United States.

That has created a present prostate cancer crisis.

A PSA test from a doctor would determine whether a man has a normal prostate, but he must request the test.

Thus, the 2022 Prostate Health Education Network's Prostate Cancer Disparity Rally and Virtual Town Hall in North Carolina on Thursday, February 24th starting at 6 p.m..

According to Thomas Farrington, Prostate Health Education Network founder and president, the Virtual Town Hall and Rally is vital for all Black men to watch and be a part of. “Black men in North Carolina and around the country will be hit the hardest by this prostate cancer crisis,” says Farrington. “The rally’s broad radio and social media awareness campaign, culminating with our town hall meeting, aims to mobilize sustained actions towards eliminating the prostate cancer racial disparity in North Carolina.”

You can register for free for this ZOOM event at

If you’re an African-American man ages 45 and up, don’t let this vital opportunity to learn about protecting your health, and your life, pass you by.



Monday, February 7, 2022



                                                                 REV. DR. CARDES H. BROWN, JR.





By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

The national office of the NAACP has responded to the NC Justice Coalition of concerned NC NAACP members who have filed a complaint about the controversial October 23, 2021 executive officers election.

The press statement effectively says the election controversy is over.

Advised of that statement, which he says was never sent to him or any of the Coalition members, Rev. Dr. Cardes H. Brown, Jr., servant leader of the Coalition, dismissed it, and vowed to press the case to have the elections held again.

The December 17, 2021 press statement from the national NAACP Office, states that the NC NAACP State conference was placed under “administership in 2020 [when] the regularly scheduled election was postponed resulting in then [NC NAACP Pres. T. Anthony ] Spearman serving two additional years beyond his term.”

The NAACP statement continued, “In July 2021, the NAACP National Office designated an Administrator to the NAACP North Carolina State Conference to address recurring matters and ensure that the state conference’s Bi-annual election followed rigorous NAACP bylaws.”

The national NAACP statement then states that “all-State Conference elections, including the North Carolina State Conference, were conducted using the Election buddy technology system.”

In effect, the national office is saying Election Buddy was used for the October 23, 2021 election.

After describing how Election Buddy works, the statement says NC NAACP incumbent Rev. Dr. Spearman “…was defeated by a margin of two to one in the most recent election.”

The NAACP statement then adds that “No grievance filed warranted a re-administration of the election, and the Committee voted unanimously to dismiss the complaint. The duly elected officers of the NC State Conference have been installed by the Chairman of the Board…” identifying the new NCNAACP president as Deborah Dicks-Maxwell, among other newly election officers.

Then the national NAACP office makes a direct rhetorical assault on Rev. Dr. Brown’s group.

“There is no Unit of the Association that is identified or authorized to act as “North Carolina Justice Coalition.” That group has no standing or affiliation with the NAACP.”

Rev. Dr. Cardes Brown Jr., Coalition servant-leader and pastor of new Light Missionary Baptist Church, dismissed the Dec. 17, 2021 NAACP press statement as “flawed” and mistake-ridden, and that before it was shared with him Monday night, he had not seen or heard of it before then.

Rev. Brown made the point that all NAACP elections are held in odd-numbered years, so contrary to the statement, the “regularly scheduled” NCNAACP executive office election was postponed in 2019, not 2020.

Brown recalls NAACP Pres./CEO Derrick Johnson going to the NCNAACP Convention that year and calling off the election because of the Rev. Curtis Gatewood alleged sexual harassment allegations. 

Gloria Sweet-love, the president of the Tennessee NAACP conference, was also designated administrator of the NCNAACP  then.

Rev. Brown insists that the entire NCNAACP election process was mishandled last October, and not held according to established NAACP Constitution and Bylaws. He disagreed that an Election Buddy system was used, saying that qualified voting members were left out because two elections were held on Oct. 23rd, with the results of the first election inexplicably thrown out.

Rev. Brown also noted that the new NCNAACP executive officers were virtually installed just a few weeks ago in January, not in December or before, as suggested in the press statement. And he also had difficulty with the statement line, “no grievance filed warranted a re-administration of the election.”

According to the NAACP Constitution and Bylaws, an Article 10 complaint, beyond consideration by “the Committee,” must also be considered by the NAACP Board of Directors, which hasn’t happened yet.

Rev. Dr. Brown reiterated that the Coalition’s problems are not with the national NAACP, which they all still love and cherish, but with Pres. Derrick Johnson and those with him running the civil rights organization.


                                                               ATTY. IRVING JOYNER




By Cash Michaels

an analysis

Republican legislative leaders in the NC General Assembly have until Feb. 18 to redraw their “unconstitutional” GOP-leaning redistricting maps the NC Supreme Court knocked down February 4th or a lower court will do it for them.

Two questions - will GOP lawmakers do it, or will they refuse?

At stake - Republican ability to increase their numbers to takeover Congress next session, and build supermajorities in the NC General Assembly in this fall’s elections, and for the next ten years.

It has now been almost a week since the state’s High Court, in a  4-3 party-line decision overturning a previous lower court ruling, decided against the Republican maps for the upcoming 2022 congressional and legislative races, ruling that they were “unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt.” 

If the GOP congressional map was allowed to proceed, Republicans would likely win 11 of 14 districts drawn, crippling Black voting strength in the process.

The same with legislative House and Senate districts. 

“Many of the changes GOP lawmakers made to give themselves more seats in the future came at the expense of Black Democrats in Eastern North Carolina — particularly centered around Rocky Mount and Wilson — after Republicans decided to draw the maps without using racial data that would protect majority-minority districts,” reported the News and Observer newspaper.

“…[T]he General Assembly must not diminish or dilute any individual’s vote on the basis of partisan affiliation,” the NC High Court order said.

The court’s four Democrat judges agreed that the maps, as drawn, fundamentally denied Black voters in the state their right to fairly elect representatives of their choosing, and “equal protection under the law,” thus making the maps unconstitutional.

When a districting plan systematically makes it harder for one group of voters to elect a governing majority than another group of voters of equal size, the General Assembly unconstitutionally infringes upon that voter's fundamental right to vote," wrote Democrat Justice Robin Hudson for the majority.

The High Court’s three-justice Republican minority disagreed, saying that North Carolina’s Constitution does not guarantee “fair” elections, only “free” elections, and further, that it is not the court’s prerogative to decide what is fair when it comes to political questions like voting districts. 

In effect, the same bi-partisan decision arrived at by a lower court three-judge  panel January 11th before the state Supreme Court took the case, even though that same panel also noted that the GOP maps were “…a partisan outlier intentionally and carefully designed to maximize Republican advantage,” thus leading to results that are “incompatible with democratic principles.”

“We have ‘free.’ We don't have ‘fair’,”  Chief Justice Paul Newby, a Republican, rhetorically asked during case arguments Feb. 2nd.

Several states, like Pennsylvania, do specifically note “free’ and “fair’ elections in their constitutions.

         Thus, Republicans argued, extreme partisanship in redrawing the maps should not be a legal question since the state Constitution does not specifically outlaw it, but a political one that only elected leaders in charge of redistricting should answer.

Supporters of the 4-3 decision vigorously disagreed.

“Today’s ruling is an unequivocal win for North Carolina’s black voters….,” said Attorney Allison Riggs with the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, representing one of the plaintiffs, Common Cause, remarked last Friday.

There were also plaudits from Governor Roy Cooper, North Carolina’s Democratic congressional delegation and NC Democratic legislative leaders.

On the other side, anything but applause from GOP critics.

“What a shock,” State Sen Dan Bishop tweeted. “4-3 decision. Only Democrat judges struck down maps drawn by a Republican legislature. For 140 years of unbroken Democrat rule, they failed to see a problem. Elections for the Supreme Court majority are around the corner.”

If Republican legislative leaders do submit new redistricting plans to a lower court three-judge panel by Feb. 18th, that panel will have until Feb. 23rd to either approve the newly submitted maps, or select different ones. Candidate filing will resume on Feb. 24th from last December, and the May 17th primaries will then go on as planned.

My anticipation is that they will continue to defy and will adopt similar maps while engaging in a campaign to paint the Democratic [justices] as being unethical and overly partisan,” surmised Irving Joyner, law professor at North Carolina Central University School of Law in Durham.” I do expect the noise about impeaching the [Democrat justices] to ramp up and that possibly there will be that attempt to do so.”


                                    NC JUSTICE COALITION WEBSITE



By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

The servant leader of the NC Justice Coalition has formally reminded the national general counsel of the NAACP, in a letter,  that according to the civil rights organization’s constitution and bylaws, there must be resolution of the Article 10 complaint filed in the wake of the controversial October 23rd election on NC NAACP executive officers.

However, according to National NAACP Pres. Derrick Johnson in a December 14th missive, that matter has already been decided, and in fact, the NC NAACP executive officers elected on October 23, 2021 were recently formally installed, something detractors call “unconstitutional.”

Meanwhile, there was evidence of longstanding internal bad blood last week as a cherished NC NAACP official was laid to rest.

In a February 4th letter to National NAACP General Counsel McCarthy Wallace, Rev. Dr. Cardes H. Brown, Jr., pastor of New Light Missionary Baptist Church in Greensboro; NAACP Life member; former NAACP branch president; and now, servant leader of the “NC Justice Coalition” - several concerned members of the NC NAACP who came together last year to file the Article 10 complaint with the national NAACP - reminded  Gen. Counsel Wallace that according to the NAACP Constitution and Bylaws, “Pending resolution of the [State Conference Election Controversy] dispute, officers whose terms were to have expired with the new election, will continue to function.”

Rev. Brown the cites supportive pages, and provides a link to exactly what chapters and verses in the NAACP Constitution and Bylaws he’s referring to.

Then, after providing his credentials  that empower him to represent the NC Justice Coalition, Rev. Dr. Brown then addresses the December 14th, 2021 letter he received from National NAACP Pres./CEO Derrick Johnson that essentially told Brown that the Justice Coalition’s election challenge was quashed “pending approval by the appropriate body.”

However Dr. Brown points out that Johnson used the wrong NAACP Constitution and Bylaws citation to justify his action, saying that its was “for units (branch or chapters), NOT for state conferences.”

Rev. Brown then states that Rev. Dr. T. Anthony Spearman., ousted NC NAACP president after the Oct. 23rd elections, has agreed to continue serving as president “pending resolution” of the Article 10 complaint.

NAACP bylaws maintain that during the course of an election dispute, all current officers remain in their positions.

If true, that would mean that Deborah Dicks Maxwell, formerly the New Hanover County NAACP president and now widely seen as the new NC NAACP president succeeding Rev. Spearman, would have to step aside “pending resolution’ of the election controversy.

Ms. Dicks-Maxwell was asked to comment on the Justice Coalition contention, and was even sent a copy of Rev. Brown’s Feb. 4th letter so she could see for herself.

She decided not to render any direct comment.

It is imperative that this matter is resolved expeditiously so that our State Conference might continue to fight for voting rights and other pressing issues…,” Rev. Dr. Brown concluded his letter, “… including through litigation, development, and advocacy efforts that require clarity about who the official Officers of the State Conference are, with the authority to speak on behalf of and make decisions on behalf of the State Conference.

Rev. Dr. Brown’s letter was copied to attorneys Al McSurely, Mark Cummings, and Irving Joyner (NC NAACP Legal Redress chair).

There was no response from NAACP General Counsel Wallace by press time.

The letter comes on the heels of the unveiling of the NC Justice Coalition’s new website ( Pictures of all NCJC members, plus sections on the Article 10 complaint and the issues surrounding the election controversy, are contained there.

Meanwhile in an unrelated matter, the body of NC NAACP First Vice President and National NAACP Board member Carolyn Q. Coleman was laid to rest February 3rd in Greensboro after funeral services.

However in a telling gesture, sources say two of the NC NAACP’s former presidents - Bishop William Barber and Rev. Dr. T. Anthony Spearman, both members of the NC Justice Coalition - along with Justice Coalition’s servant leader Rev. Dr. Cardes Brown Jr., were asked not to attend.

A news photographer confirmed that they were not present.

Dr. Brown confirmed that disturbing allegation the day after in a phone call with this reporter. He maintained that he does not hold Ms. Coleman’s family responsible, but rather the political divisions within the NCNAACP.

It had been reported by sources within the NC NAACP that there had been tension between certain members in NC NAACP leadership during both Bishop Barber’s and Rev. Dr. Spearman’s tenures.


                                      U.S. REP. ALMA ADAMS (D-NC-12)



By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

Who is behind bomb threats targeting historically Black colleges and universities across the nation and here in North Carolina?

It was Tuesday evening, January 4th of this year, when North Carolina Central University in Durham sent out a temporary campus-wide evacuation notice after a bomb threat.

Faculty were urged to go home, and students who couldn’t go home were told to report to a nearby high school for safety. It was later that an all-clear sign was given for everyone to return to campus. No explosive device(s) were found.

At the time, Howard University, Xavier University of Louisiana, Texas Southern University, Norfolk State University and Prairie View A&M University all had received similar bomb threats, but again, no explosive devices were found.

Then it happened again.

“We are deeply disturbed by a second round of bomb threats at HBCU campuses within a month,” Congresswoman Alma Adams (D-NC-12), founder and co-chair of the Congressional Bipartisan HBCU Caucus said in a statement January 31st. “Solving these crimes and bringing those responsible to justice should be a top priority for federal law enforcement.”

The next day on February 1st, 14 HBCUs reported bomb threats. Congresswoman Adams, along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and  Congressional Black Caucus Chair Joyce Beatty, issued a statement:

“The continued bomb threats against HBCUs are hate crimes that must be prosecuted o the fullest extent of the law. This third round of bomb threats on HBCU campuses demands a swift response from federal and state law enforcement agencies.”

The joint statement went on to lament that the threats were continuing into February, Black History Month.

“We are closely monitoring the situation and doing everything we can to bring an wend to threats,” the statement continued. “Terrorism an racism have no place on college campuses or anywhere in our nation.”

As of last Monday, at presstime, there have been at least three rounds of bomb threats called in to additional HBCUs across the country, alarming students, parents and elected leaders at institutions like Bowie State University in Maryland, Albany State University in Georgia, Southern University in Baton Rouge, Bethune-Cookman University in Florida, Delaware State University, Morgan State University in Maryland, and Spelman College in Georgia.

The White House has expressed alarm, promising to engage with federal agencies to root out the source of the threats.

More than 20 FBI field offices around the nation are investigating the series of bomb threats at HBCUs. “These threats are being investigated as racially or ethically motivated violent extremism and hate crimes,” the FBI announced. Published reports indicate that at least six “tech-savvy” minor young people of interest are being looked at, according to NBC News.