BLACK RALEIGH CITY COUNCIL
MEMBER TARGETED WITH RACIST
INVECTIVE DURING ZOOM MEETING
By Cash Michaels
Contributing writer
New safeguards are being put in place after an African-American first-term Raleigh city councillor became the target of hateful, racist slurs during an April 22nd Midtown Citizens Advisory Council (CAC) on Zoom.
CACs are city council sanctioned neighborhood groups that meet about various issues specifically to that community, which they then communicate with the Raleigh City Council about.
According to published reports, the CAC meeting, which was being held virtually and in-person at the Millbrook Exchange Community Center in North Raleigh, was Zoom-bombed by unseen trolls who went after District A Councilwoman Mary Black, calling her the N-word and B-words, among other slurs.
The trolls, who had their cameras off, also flung invective towards Jews and the police.
Councillor Black is one of three African-Americans currently serving on the eight-member Raleigh City Council.
The episode shocked the young councilwoman, who believed that Raleigh was a great example of a city that prided itself for its growing post-racial diversity. But there are signs that amidst that diversity, racism is still ever -present.
A Black bookstore for children, Liberation Station, was recently forced to leave its downtown Raleigh location after receiving verbal racial phone calls and death threats.
Raleigh Police have not determined who is responsible.
In an interview with ABC-11, Councillor Black shared how shaken she was after being racially attacked over Zoom, apparently for no reason other than the color of her skin.
"It was pretty vicious. They were calling me names: the N word and B word. They were telling me to go back to Africa -- I don't belong here and making monkey noises," Black told the TV station . "When the call ended my hands were shaking and I burst into tears."
After the hijacked Zoom meeting, Black said she and a friend cried together. She did not, however, file a police report, but did tell Raleigh City Council staff and other members.
-30-
NC NAACP VOTER ID TRIAL
IN WINSTON-SALEM
SCHEDULED FOR MAY 6TH
By Cash Michaels
Contributing writer
In yet another legal proceeding involving the 2018 voter photo identification law (SB 824), a trial will commence Monday, May 6th in federal court in Winston-Salem where the NC NAACP will challenge the law being of “discriminatory intent.”
U.S. District Court Judge Loretta Biggs, an African-American, will be presiding.
Both Alan Hirsch, chairman of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, and State Senate President Pro Tem Phillip E. Berger, are the defendants in the case.
According to the NC NAACP’s trial brief, “The trial will confirm the discriminatory intent behind the passage of S.B. 824 and its discriminatory impact, in part through testimony from and about voters who encountered undue burdens and/or were prevented from voting during the Fall 2023 and March 2024 elections, the first elections where S.B. 824 was implemented. Absent relief, thousands of North Carolinians will similarly have their right to vote unconstitutionally abridged. The challenged provisions should be permanently enjoined on the basis of these constitutional and statutory violations.”
The NC NAACP plaintiffs’ trial brief states that it will set forth evidence showing that it has “…diverted resources to address the changes in election law imposed by S.B. 824, including diverting resources to educate the community about obtaining the needed photo IDs and how to use the Reasonable Impediment Declaration process. Since a mission of the NC NAACP is to mobilize and empower Black voters, the disparate racial impacts of S.B. 824 thwart the broad organizational mission of the NC NAACP and its Chapters.
Regarding whether the voter photo ID law was enacted with discriminatory intent in mind, the plaintiffs brief states they need not prove “…race-based hatred or outright racism, or that any particular legislator harbored racial animosity or ill-will towards minorities because of their race, but only that “acting to preserve legislative power in a partisan manner can also be impermissibly discriminatory.”
“[I]ntentionally targeting a particular race’s access to the franchise because its members vote for a particular party, in a predictable manner, constitutes discriminatory purpose.”
Noting that North Carolina has a long history of discriminating against Black and latino voters, the NC NAACP brief continues, “the historic pattern of racial discrimination “provides important context for determining whether the same decision-making body has also enacted a law with discriminatory purpose.”
The NC NAACP Plaintiff’s trial brief concludes, “The photo Voter ID provisions and the Challenge Provisions of S.B. 824 violate the 14th and 15th Amendments and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Plaintiffs will demonstrate at trial that S.B. 824 was enacted with discriminatory intent in violation of the Constitution and constitutes an impermissible infringement on the right to vote under the totality of the circumstances, in violation of Section 2. This Court should issue an injunction striking S.B. 824 and should retain jurisdiction over North Carolina’s future efforts to regulate elections under Section 3(c) of the VRA.”
Senate Leader Berger and defendants dismiss any accusations of discriminatory intent per the 2018 voter ID law.
In their trial brief they write, “S.B.824 ‘is one of the least restrictive voter identification laws in the United States.’ ‘Indeed,’ as the Fourth Circuit previously ruled, ‘the 2018 Voter-ID Law is more protective of the right to vote than other states’ voter-ID laws that courts have approved.
“Indeed, S.B.824 guarantees that ‘[a]ll registered voters will be allowed to vote with or without a photo ID card.’ The law’s sweeping reasonable impediment provision allows voters to provide any reason at all for lacking ID and cast a ballot that will count so long as they do not lie on the form accompanying the ballot.”
“But S.B.824 does not simply rely on the reasonable impediment provision to ensure that citizens will be able to vote. It has a lengthy list of qualifying IDs that are possessed by the vast majority of voters,” the legislative brief continued. “S.B.824 even created an entirely new form of ID available for free, without any underlying documentation, at every county board of elections in the State. Voters may obtain that ID through the end of early voting, a form of voting used disproportionately by minorities, and immediately use it to vote. If they have not obtained an ID by election day, they may cast a provisional ballot and then return to the board of elections within nine days to obtain a free ID and use it to cure their ballot during that same trip.”
“A legislature bent on discrimination would not go to such great lengths to ensure that all registered voters can vote with or without ID.”
As is customary, both sides will have witness and expert witness testimony at trial to bolster their cases.
There will be no jury for this trial, meaning that only Judge Biggs will rule.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment