THE CASH STUFF FOR JANUARY 25

                                                     ASSOCIATE JUSTICE ANITA EARLS

JUSTICE EARLS DROPS 

LAWSUIT, BUT CAN SHE 

STILL SPEAK OUT?

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

Associate Justice Anita Earls has indeed dropped her federal lawsuit against the NC Judicial Standards Commission (NCJSC), after first claiming that its investigations into her press interviews and speeches “chilled” her free speech rights to address racial inequities she found in the state judiciary.

“However, I see no need to continue the litigation since the Commission has dismissed the complaint against me and at this time I no longer face being disciplined by the Court. I am enormously grateful to all the individuals and organizations, in North Carolina and nationally, who supported me while this case was pending,” Earls said in a statement.

In return, the NCJSC dropped its investigation into Earls after first alleging that her criticisms of her conservative colleagues on the state Supreme Court hurt the image of the judiciary.

But even though both sides have dropped their swords, the issue remains the same - Justice Earls is the only African-American woman on the state Supreme Court, and one of only two Democratic females. Observers say that makes her a political target on a judicial body that is led by Republicans, some of whom have expressed irritation with Earls being there. 

As reported previously, Justice Earls has served on the state Supreme Court since she was elected to it in 2018 by 1.8 million votes statewide. When she took her seat, Republican colleague/now Chief Justice Paul Newby greeted her with a public statement that her election kept him up at night.

Also reported last year, after Earls wrote in a dissenting opinion that a majority decision by the five Republicans on the High Court, “hurt the integrity of our justice system and our citizens’ faith in it,” Republican Justice Richard Dietz immediately personally attacked Earls, writing “Once again, this Court enters a routine order that draws an exaggerated, hyperbolic dissent from one of my colleagues.” 

“My colleague accuses the majority of seeking ‘power’ over reason, of engaging in a ‘radically destabilizing shift,’ of attempting to ‘brazenly warp the law,’ and on and on…Like so many of my colleague’s dissents, this one has portions that read more like pulp fiction than a legal opinion.”

Justice Dietz then added, “One can reasonably disagree with our approach, but to claim that our decision comes ‘at the cost of the integrity of our justice system and our citizens’ faith in it’ is a bit unhinged.”

As long as Justice Earls remains on the High Court, can she expect this same kind of treatment from her Republican colleagues? And if that is the case, can she speak out about it, as she did last year before someone filed a complaint against her with the NCJSC?

One of the reasons Earls’ Republican colleagues disliked her from the start 

was Earls’ outstanding record as a progressive civil rights attorney, successfully challenging unconstitutional voter ID laws and redistricting voting maps from the GOP-led legislature. Once she got on the court, she began speaking out about the lack of diversity among court clerks who serve the justices, and the lack of both racial and gender diversity of the attorneys who argue before the court.

She also revealed how her Republican colleagues would disrespect female attorneys who come before the court, and even cut her off during remarks.

Earls publicly criticized Chief Justice Newby for ending implicit bias training at the court, telling her that it was not needed, and she said in a published interview that her Republican colleagues on the High Court were “the conservative bloc” that places its ideology ahead of the “institution.”

Can she still do that if she sees the need?

“I continue to believe that the First Amendment protects my ability to speak about matters of racial equity in the legal system,” Earls said in a statement. The dismissal of her federal lawsuit was done “without prejudice,” meaning that if Justice Earls decides to refile it, she can at a later date.

If the Judicial Standards Commission had completed its investigation of Justice Earls, and found her at fault, her colleagues on the state Supreme Court would have been left with the task of deciding her punishment, which could have included her removal from the bench.

-30-

                                                           MARK ROBINSON

                                                        BILL GRAHAM

[UPDATED AND CORRECTED]

REPUBLICANS TAKE AIM

AT ROBINSON FOR PAST

REMARKS ABOUT JEWS

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

With just over six weeks to go before the 2024 March 5th gubernatorial primaries (three weeks before Feb. 15th early voting), leading Republican candidate Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson finds himself the target of intensified attacks from other GOP candidates, hoping to knock him off his leader’s ledge in the race to win the nomination.

Robinson, considered an outspoken MAGA culture warrior, is facing two other major opponents for the N.C. Republican Party gubernatorial nomination - state Treasurer Dale Folwell and wealthy conservative attorney Bill Graham of Salisbury.

According to the latest polls, neither Folwell nor Graham are garnering anywhere near Robinson’s commanding double-digit lead. Neither has matched Robinson in terms of campaign rhetoric or controversy. 

According to Public Policy Polling (PPP) as of earlier this month, Robinson, with 55%,  had  a commanding 40-point lead over his closest competitor  Bill Graham (15%) with registered Republican primary voters.

However that same poll showed 24% of Republican primary voters undecided.

But while Folwell (7%) has issued statements questioning the lieutenant governor’s fitness for office because of his relative lack of political experience and divisive remarks about people he doesn’t like (“ he’s attacking people instead of attacking the important problems that our citizens are facing”) Graham, a conservative former prosecutor who was recently endorsed by Republican U.S. Senator Thom Tillis, has gone a step further.

Last week, Graham’s campaign began running a tough attack ad against Robinson about negative remarks he’s made about Jewish people in the past. 

In the ad, Graham’s campaign calls Robinson an “antisemite,” and further charges that the lt. governor “is aligning himself with Hamas,” the terrorist group responsible for the deadly Oct. 7th attack in Israel last year.

Despite his past negative remarks about Jews, Robinson recently tried to portray himself as a friend of Israel, even taking a trip there last fall.

“Bill Graham is regurgitating the same dishonest lies the Democrats use because the Republican primary is over and he can’t handle it," Robinson campaign spokesman Bill Lonergan, told Raleigh TV station CBS17. "Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson stands with Israel and the Jewish people – and he’s never questioned the Holocaust.” 

    That same PPP poll asked "Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Mark Robinson?" Favorable of Robinson was 53%; unfavorable 11%.

Graham is seeking to drive Robinson’s negative numbers up, and hopefully, do so in a manner to attract many of the undecided Republicans who have not made a decision as to which Republican they will support yet.

    According to the political newsletter "Politics NC," Graham has told reporters, “If this guy is nominated by the Republican Party I will guarantee a loss and (Democrat) Josh Stein will be the governor for the next four years.”

PPP also shows Republican former President Donald Trump with a 66% lead in North Carolina over Republican primary rivals Nikki Haley (12%) and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (9%). DeSantis suspended his campaign for president Sunday right before the New Hampshire primary.

There is little question that Robinson is benefiting from his close association with Trump. PPP showed that 43% of those polled are "more likely" to vote for a candidate that he endorsed. The MAGA former president not only has endorsed the black Republican’s campaign for governor, but recently said that Robinson speaks even better that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr..

And what would happen if Mark Robinson were to face Democratic frontrunner Josh Stein, the current NC State attorney general in November? According to the most recent East Carolina University Research Center polling from November, Robinson would win 44% to 40%, with 16% undecided.

Bill Graham, with his television campaign blitz against Robinson, is hoping to topple Robinson’s substantial lead now, and fast, so that he can face the Democratic gubernatorial winner in November. However the same ECU poll  shows that when matched up with Stein, if he's that Democrat, Graham loses 42% to 39%.

    In unrelated 2024 electoral news, a federal judge ruled earlier this week that several changes to 2024 election laws made by the Republican-led NC General Assembly are likely unconstitutional and will be blocked from going into effect.

    Those changes, now void, would affect same day registration with early voting.

    Republican legislative leaders plan to appeal the ruling.

-30=

THE CASH STUFF FOR THURSDAY, JANUARY 18, 2024

 IS ABORTION AN IMPORTANT 

ISSUE FOR BLACKS IN THE 

2024 ELECTION?

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

The Democratic Party in North Carolina, and across the country, is facing the same challenge - the top of the national ticket is considered by many to be weak and unaccomplished. More importantly, traditionally loyal voting groups like African-Americans and young people feel that they are not being heard by the officials they elect.

With Republicans generating most of the election excitement because of their fealty to former President Donald Trump, and, according to USA Today, a November 2023 poll showing 22% of African-Americans in six battleground states supporting Trump, Democrats are left with but one issue that has proven, amid numerous challenges, to deliver at the polls.

Abortion.

62% of Americans, Pew Research shows, disagreed with the High Court after it struck down a woman’s right to choose in a controversial June 2022 landmark ruling. That decision, however,  proved to be a boon for Democrats in Virginia, Kentucky and Ohio during the 2023 off-year elections, and most political observers believe the same magic will work again against Republicans in 2024. 

In Ohio last Nov. 7th, voters approved a constitutional amendment protecting abortion rights until 24-week viability. More than 8 in ten African-American voters, according to an NBC News exit poll, supported the measure.

In Virginia, where the Republican governor threatened to institute a 15-week abortion ban if his party took over the Democrat-controlled state Senate, he not only lost the Senate, but also the state House, based on strong Black voter turnout.

And in Kentucky, the Black Republican state attorney general there - endorsed by Donald Trump- was beaten by the incumbent white Democratic abortion rights supporting governor on the strength of the Black vote.

Still, despite those and other off-year successes, Black voting was off by ten percent during the previous 2022 midterms overall compared to the 2018 midterms, so observers are simply not certain whether African-American Democratic voters will indeed show up to the polls in 2024.

         One thing research has shown, and that’s while African-Americans do support a woman’s right to choose in healthy numbers (more are accepting of it today than ever before polls show), not unlike other traditional Democratic groups like white women, abortion is not a singular issue with Blacks.

Infant mortality, access to affordable health care, economic turmoil, maintaining voting rights, improving education, stemming police brutality, gun violence and other issues also top the list of voting priorities for African-Americans.

But there is encouraging evidence for Democratic Party observers.

A September 2023 poll of black women nationally - The Democratic Party’s most loyal constituency -  by the Highland Project, found that among their top three issues of concern was protecting reproductive freedom, including abortion rights.

African-Americans are projected to make up 14% of all eligible U.S. voters in 2024, according to Pew Research. As of 2022, North Carolina, with 1.8 million African-Americans, is one of the top eight states that comprise 52% of all eligible Black voters.

So with the Republican-led NC General Assembly last year passing a 12-week abortion ban, African-Americans, who make up the most loyal base of the state Democratic Party, are expected to be a large part of the strong voting coalition turning out this fall.

That means abortion could be an important election issue for African-American Democrats here as it is to the rest of the party at the polls. Still, the question is, will Black Democrats punish Republicans for limiting their reproductive freedom?

Who the next governor of North Carolina is will be determined by the answer to that question.

-30-

JUDGE FAILS TO ISSUE

INJUNCTION AGAINST

SENATE VOTING MAP

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

The federal judge hearing arguments against a NC state Senate redistricting map has thus far refused to stop it from being used in the 2024 elections.

Attorneys for two African-American plaintiffs who have filed suit against the Senate map drawn and approved by NC Republican legislative leaders say it does not allow Black voters in at least two Senate districts to elect candidates of their choice because the Black voting population there is deliberately “cracked” or diluted to prevent that from happening. 

“The chance of a Black candidate winning …is highly, highly unlikely,” Edwin Speas, plaintiffs’ attorney, told Judge Dever.

        Speas added that that violates the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

Democrats were not allowed to have any input in how the Senate voting districts were drawn.

They asked Judge James Dever to issue an immediate injunction to stop the Senate voting map from being used during the upcoming 2024 elections, which begin with the March 5th Super Tuesday primaries.

Lawyers for the NC legislature, however, contend that race was not a factor in how the Senate redistricting map was drawn, and if the two Senate Districts in question - Districts 1 and 2 - are changed, that would alter the entire makeup of the Senate voting map. Defendants’ attorneys further argue that there wouldn’t be enough time to redraw and approve the state Senate map before the March 5th Super Tuesday primaries. 

If that happened, Republicans could possibly lose their one vote supermajority veto-proof advantage in the state Senate.

Phillip J. Strach, attorney for Republican lawmakers, maintained that Democratic plaintiffs previously argued against race being used in drawing district maps.

“I guess the problem was Republicans kept winning the legislature,” Strach said.

Judge Dever was reluctant to do anything to stop Senate Districts 1 and 2 from being used in the redistricting map, saying that to do so would be “extraordinary.” He did not issue a ruling during the hearing, but is expected to rule at anytime within less than 60 days.

The U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals was petitioned to get involved in the case, but rejected that motion.

Judge Dever is refusing to move any faster than he feels he needs to, saying that plaintiffs had plenty of time since the NC legislature passed the Senate voting map last October to file suit, but for some reason, waited more than a month afterwards to do so.

This is just one of several federal lawsuits filed against the NC General Assembly’s 2023 redistricting plans.

-30-

THE CASH STUFF FOR THURSDAY, JANUARY 11, 2024

                                                     DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

CONSERVATIVES TWIST DR. KING’S

WORDS TO PUSH THEIR AGENDA

By Cash Michaels

An analysis

As President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamila Harris traverse the country these days trying to reenergize their once considerable Black voter support, conservative Republicans, once again, are doing all they can to counter those efforts by attempting to tell African-Americans what civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. “really stood for.”

“Today is the day when Republicans quote MLK and pretend he would be all for voter ID laws,” quipped “Machine Pun Kelly” Scaletta on “X,” formerly known as Twitter, on King Day, January 2023, noting how Republicans religiously quote from Dr. King’s 1963 speech “…I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Observers like Scaletta then note how those same Republican conservatives would brazenly work to curtail voting rights for African-Americans, the very issue Dr. King gave his life for.

Without question there are voices who do not buy into Dr. King’s dream of human diversity, equity and inclusion. Instead, these politically conservative voices insist that Dr. King was a strong proponent of what they represent, namely the destruction of all things that represent diversity, equity and inclusion.

These conservatives misinterpret  Dr. King’s message of brotherhood as one of “colorblindness” -  the deliberate ignorance of a person’s ethnicity, gender or sexual preference.

According to Andre Archie, a Black conservative author and professor at Colorado State University, the “cult” of diversity, equity and inclusion “…has harmed society and is contrary to the vision of America’s greatest civil rights leaders…”

But the pure definition of “blind” or “blindness” means you cannot see, do not see, or refuse to see.

What Dr. King dreamed of was an America that would one day be a nation that not only saw racial, gender and sexual preference differences, but respected them, allowing “..little white girls and little Black boys to hold hands as sisters and brothers.”

Most of Dr. King’s followers would agree that you cannot respect something or someone you cannot see. Nor can you build meaningful relationships between human beings of different backgrounds if you refuse to respect them for who or what they are.

“[Dr. King’s] “I Have a Dream” speech proscribes a powerful hope for righting injustices facing children today: creating a world where people are not color blind, but color kind.” wrote author Colin Seale in his January, 2020 Forbes Magazine article, ‘MLK’s “I Have a Dream” Speech and Rejecting Colorblindness for Today’s Children.”

Seale continued, “ Dr. King’s line about not judging his children “by the color of their skin but by the content of their character” is too often shamefully applied to argue against affirmative action or any race-based remedy to historical injustice. But the “I Have a Dream” speech itself contradicts this in his bold call for fighting the fight “until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.” Moreover, his public views before and after his speech included …social reforms for African Americans similar to the G.I. Bill, and a call for “massive” reparations that were bold, but “less expensive than any computation based on two centuries of unpaid wages and accumulated interest." 

Seale notes that author Ibram X. Kendi says that “the opposite of racist isn’t “not racist.” It is anti-racist.”

By Dr. King’s philosophy, fighting racism with laws, common purpose and equal justice are the keys to building a just society. But to hear conservatives tell it, there is no racism to fight, unless they define it, and enlist the aid of Black conservatives to address it.

So when it comes to police brutality, educational inequity, poor health care and housing, and poverty, “righteous” Americans should be not just be colorblind, but be blind to those things, conservative Republicans say.

And they prefer that we all be blind to the color of human beings affected too.

That certainly wasn’t was Dr. King ever said or meant.

“I believe that wounded justice, lying prostrate on the blood-flowing streets of our nations, can be lifted from this dust of shame to reign supreme among the children of men,” King said in 1964 upon accepting his Nobel Peace Prize.

“I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits.”

“This MLK Day,” writes Daily Beast columnist Ernest Owens, “… Republicans could start putting some respect on Dr. King’s name by respecting his ideas. Failing that, they should keep his name out of their mouths.”

-30-

                                               LT. GOV. MARK ROBINSON

WHAT DOES ROBINSON KNOW

ABOUT ALLEGED ILLEGAL

CONTRIBUTIONS TO HIS 2020

CAMPAIGN?

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

In an open letter by the former executive director of the progressive advocacy group Democracy North Carolina, Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, currently the Republican frontrunner in the 2024 gubernatorial race, is being asked about “…a long-running government investigation into alleged crimes committed..." during his 2020 campaign.

That open letter to Robinson is from Bob Hall, who is also a veteran government and campaign watchdog.

In an article published January 8th in the progressive NC Newsline, Hall says the state investigation into Robinson's 2020 campaign is secret by state law, but that it was initiated by a complaint Hall filed with the NC Board of Elections in 2021, and to the best of his knowledge, the probe is still open and ongoing.

In the open letter to Robinson, Hall writes, “A year from now, you could be sworn in as the new Governor of North Carolina. A week later, you could be charged with criminal violations from an ongoing investigation into more than $500,000 of apparent illegal activity related to your 2020 campaign. Illegal cash donations; contributions in illegal amounts and from illegal donors; illegal cash withdrawals; illegal credit card charges and illegal expenses; illegal disclosure of financial transactions.”

Hall’s letter continued, “The investigation of your campaign has continued for three years, beginning with my complaint to the State Board of Elections in February 2021. Back then, your campaign consultant dismissed the problems as “clerical errors” and said “new staff” would work with the State Board of Elections to “fix any and all mistakes” and submit amended reports. You told a reporter any problems would be handled “quick, fast and in a hurry.”

"But there are no amended reports and the investigation continues," Hll's open letter continues." "If your case wasn’t about such substantial wrongdoing or if you were fully cooperating with authorities, the investigation likely would have ended by now. What’s going on? What are you telling investigators? Is the Wake County District Attorney or FBI involved? The public shouldn’t be kept in the dark.”

Rather than be surprised, voters need to hear from you now – before the primary, not after the November election. For accountability and transparency, please give people a truthful explanation. In the past, when reporters asked about a mysterious $2,400 cash withdrawal from your campaign in 2020, they received two different answers – it was either a typo for a $20 withdrawal or a cash refund for an illegal $2,400 contribution from a business. Please, no more excuses or fake news."

Hall went on in his open letter to outline ten different allegations of illegal campaign transactions in Robinson’s 2020 campaign for lt. governor.

Hall told Robinson in his open letter that he would be attending the January 9th Council of State meeting where he hoped “…we can talk about these matters after the meeting."

This article was completed prior to that meeting, but in the past, Robinson has told WRAL-TV News that  he's bringing in someone new "...to keep his campaign books and that the issues will be handled "quick, fast and in a hurry."

There’s been no public word from Robinson about these matters since then.

-30-