Preview

Court Case Summary

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
464 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Court Case Summary
In December, Republican North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory signed into law a bill that limits Gov. –elect Roy Cooper’s power in making appointments by combining the elections board with the State Ethics Commission. The State Ethics Commission oversees ethics laws governing lobbyists, elected officials, and government employees. Under this law, governor successors are only able to appoint 50% of the new board’s members under the requirement that two must be Republicans. Legislative leaders would appoint the other 50% of the new board. Previously, the Governor appointed 60% of the Board of Elections members.
In response to this law, Cooper filed a lawsuit arguing that the change in structure is a violation of the state’s constitution. Judge Donald Stephens of Wake County Superior Court blocked the law from going into effect until the lawsuit is settled, causing conflict within itself.
The article quotes the lawsuit stating, "The General
…show more content…
Stephens countered that argument, stating that he acted to quickly stop a law that may be unconstitutional from quickly being put into effect. The development of this lawsuit and approval of Senate Bill 4 is important because it affects the general public. Cooper’s lawsuit points out that without being able to take action with a simple majority, the board would deadlock and therefore not able to put election laws into effect. The concern of deadlock is because of the bipartisan requirement of 50% republican members and 50% democratic members. Cooper stated, "A tie on a partisan vote would accomplish what many Republicans want: making it harder for North Carolinians to vote. It will result in elections with longer lines, reduced early voting, fewer voting places, little enforcement of campaign finance laws, indecision by officials and mass

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    The issue with this case is that does it violate the Fourteenth Amendment. Which in short says that no other state has the…

    • 282 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Case Brief

    • 455 Words
    • 2 Pages

    REASON The court recognized its decision in Peterson v. Holtrachem, Inc., as controlling, and as the decision in Peterson is contrary to the trial court's decision, they reversed the decision of the trial court.…

    • 455 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    * Tolson, Franita, Partisan Gerrymandering as a Safeguard of Federalism (December 19, 2010). 2010 Utah Law Review 859 (2010); FSU College of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 470. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1674507…

    • 777 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Pros And Cons Of SJR 1

    • 320 Words
    • 2 Pages

    SJR 1 is wrong for several reasons, first, it is a clear violation of the Constitution of the State of Oregon and the Constitution of the United States of America. SJR 1 not only gives special privilege to law enforcement but it defeats the entire purpose of the Constitution Article that it is amending, almost rendering the Article useless. Sec. 9 (1) clearly reads that “No law shall…

    • 320 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    A thought has now been formed in the reader’s mind that the only way that the panel is able to get down to the bottom of the fraudulent elections is by becoming invasive in the American people’s private information. Wine even goes as far as including that a group called Common Cause did a report that ended in the discovery that “5,000 Colorado voters de-registered so that their personal information would not get sent to Washington” (Wine A16). Furthermore, Mr. Gardner states that these accusations have tarnished the commissions image before the fraud panel even started their…

    • 770 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Antonin Scalia Summary

    • 512 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Throughout Antonin Scalia’s dissent opinion, he states that the way the court interprets the Affordable Care Act, is different to the way he interprets it. For instance, the interpretation of “exchange established by the state,” and the tax credits under code §36B differs between the court and Scalia.…

    • 512 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Ever since its creation at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the Electoral College has been the most widely debated aspect in the Constitution. There have been over 700 proposed constitutional amendments aimed at fixing or abolishing this process. And Congress has on several occasions held highly publicized hearings on Electoral College reform but overall has remained fairly inactive (Best, p. vii). And while the Electoral College is a cornerstone of our Constitution and therefore a major aspect of American democracy and government, its very nature is quite unfair and undemocratic. Many of its aspects portray biases and favor certain groups of people and certain states. It is deemed archaic, undemocratic, complex, ambiguous, indirect, and dangerous by many scholars and is in direct need of reforming (Kura, p. 30). It especially contradicts Walter Stone’s instrumental voting model for the Electoral College at first makes one believe as if one’s vote counts but eventually one figures out that it is in fact quite unimportant (Stone, p. 51). For with the Electoral College, the people are not in charge but rather the system is – the Electoral College presidential election system that is.…

    • 4911 Words
    • 20 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Senate Pros And Cons

    • 478 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Kende argues that by only having eight members on the supreme court when they go to vote on important topics soon the vote could end up a tie. He brings up how there is a federal law stating there should be nine members on the supreme court, so that the court can resolve controversial issues. Kende also brings up that the senate is nullifying one of the president’s constitutional powers by not voting and holding a hearing for President Obama’s nominee. He finally brings up how the senate doesn’t want to do this during an election year, but that numerous other nominees have been voted on during the election…

    • 478 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The concept of a direct democracy is demonstrated in the legislative branch, which is made up of twenty-one senators and forty-two assembly members. The legislature is the branch most directly receptive to the voice of the people of the state and consists of initiative, referendum, and recall. Initiative is the right to put laws into effect and propose constitutional amendments. The legislature also gives the people of the state a chance to enact, amend, or repeal laws through referendum and initiative (Erickson. 2010). Many people consider Nevada’s state legislature the most important branch in the constitution. Not only does it enact laws, but it also creates the state’s budget while establishing departments, boards, commissions, and bureaus, and outlines the extent of their powers and responsibilities. The emphasis on it being the most important is because its functionality is what serves the people and visitors of Nevada. It is the government working in action with direct results on people’s lives.…

    • 817 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Paper 1

    • 596 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In Idaho about 20 years ago, voters seeked to put term-limits in the Idaho government. During that time, a lot 60 percent of Idahoans voted for term-limits, which would then restrict the terms of elected officials all the way to county commissioners. Idaho’s term-limit policy stated that during a 15 year period you would only serve 8 years in office, and during an 11 year period you can only serve 6 years. However, since this policy did not come in effect until 1996, the new term limits could not be applied until 2004. Over that time, officeholder’s opposition grew towards these term limits. The parties that were affected by term-limits declared their opposition in 2002, because if they did not they would be forced out of office. The leaders of these parties tried to convince the people to repeal this act of term limits. Including business leaders and local officials also opposed term limits because of their potential impact of the government. In low populated areas, not very many people would be willing to work in a low-wage or no-pay offices. Also another predicament would be that the long-term offices positions could possibly not be filled. Idaho, in 2002 was the first state to repeal term limits. However, the Idahoan legislature voted for repeal overriding the governor’s veto. The supporters of term-limits then gathered votes to “repeal the repeal”. With 1,889 votes of more than 400,000 ballots cast, the legislatures were approved and were sustained from the term limit supporters.…

    • 596 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today ' s decision. One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year ' s Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation ' s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.” Through this statement it is obvious that Justice Stevens believes that the Federal Courts has no place in interfering on state voter laws and that the decision that was made by the majority of US Supreme Court Justices will negatively influence the perception of the Supreme Court. Justice Stevens is supported by Justice Breyer: “…the Court is not acting to vindicate a fundamental constitutional principle, such as the need to protect a basic human liberty. No other strong reason to act is present. Congressional statutes tend to obviate the need. And, above all, in this highly politicized matter, the appearance of a split decision runs the risk of undermining the public ' s confidence in the Court itself. That confidence is a public treasure. It has…

    • 978 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Resolved: On balance, the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission harms the election process. My partner and I stand in firm negation of today’s resolution. If my partner and I uphold that the Citizens United decision does not directly harm our election process, then we win today’s round.…

    • 809 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Justices of the United States Supreme Court are strategic actors who strive to secure policy outcomes as close to their preferred outcome as possible. Accomplishing this sometimes requires justices to not always pursue their true policy preferences and sometimes it requires justices to ignore legal and policy questions. In this essay, I will analyze how justices were strategic in a few landmark supreme court cases.…

    • 1622 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Does notoriety affect the outcome of a criminal court proceeding? A trial’s outcome should not be based on the notoriety of it, yet it is. Due to media coverage, the length of the trial, and the notoriety of the people who committed the crime, the outcome of the trial is affected. The Manson trials and the trial of Leopold and Loeb are two prime example of how notoriety can affect a criminal court proceeding. An analysis of two criminal court proceedings, the Manson trial and the trial of Leopold and Loeb, reveals that notoriety does affect criminal court proceedings. Even though criminal court proceedings should be based on unbiased information and evidence, overall, the notoriety of the case impacts it.…

    • 1467 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Their concern was that because of the Republican governments in several of the coastal counties a Republican governor might be able to “pack” the Commission using his discretionary appointments and selecting nominees from Republican counties. Although those of us promoting the bill felt this was a far-fetched concern, we still had to respond to it as the votes of certain key legislators hinged on the final wording of that provision. Finally, we decided to change the wording to 5 appointees at the Governor’s discretion and a draft reflecting that change was circulated in the legislature. One key senator balked at 5 and Jim Harrington and I went over to explain why 5 was a “magic” number that satisfied Democratic concerns about Commission “packing” yet provided adequate discretion to the Governor. After listening carefully to our explanation, he thought for a bit and finally said “that sounds alright to me, and what you say sounds fair, but if it is proposed by a bunch of Republicans, there must be something wrong with it. I can’t accept it.” So, Harrington and I left and on the way back to the office decided that if it meant passage or defeat of the bill, we would drop back to 3. The senator accepted 3 and ended up voting for the bill. In our discussion, Harrington and I agreed that in the long run the matter about which we were arguing…

    • 2001 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays