NC Democrats dismiss gerrymandering lawsuit following Supreme Court voting rights ruling
North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff//May 11, 2026//
Summary:
- NC Democrats dismiss gerrymandering lawsuit
- Rep. Rodney Pierce cites weakened Voting Rights Act
- Supreme Court ruling impacts majority-Black district claims
North Carolina Democrats have dismissed a gerrymandering lawsuit challenging the state’s Republican-drawn state Senate map in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision weakening the Voting Rights Act, according to the Raleigh News & Observer.
Rep. Rodney Pierce of Halifax County and a co-plaintiff filed notice on May 11 that they were voluntarily dismissing the suit, which had accused the legislature of diluting the voting power of Black residents in northeastern North Carolina, the News & Observer reported.
“The Supreme Court effectively made the (Voting Rights Act) a meaningless law with no teeth,” Pierce said in a statement. “Because of that decision, there is no longer a path open to us to protect the voting rights of Black citizens in my part of the state, so we have dismissed the suit.”
The lawsuit challenged North Carolina’s 2023 state Senate redistricting plan — not the congressional map — the News & Observer reported. Last fall, a federal judge ruled against Pierce, writing that he declined to direct the legislature to “engage in the odious practice of sorting voters by race in order to create a majority-Black Senate district.” Pierce had appealed that ruling to the Fourth Circuit but has now opted to abandon the case entirely.
The dismissal follows last month’s Supreme Court decision striking down Louisiana’s congressional map as a racial gerrymander, a ruling whose dissent, written by Justice Elena Kagan, warned that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act was now “all but a dead letter,” the News & Observer reported. Since the ruling, Republican-led states including Tennessee have moved to redraw congressional maps that eliminate Democrat-leaning majority-minority districts.
Related Articles
Top Legal News
- Beware of overlooking legal requirements for remote workers
- NC House pulls hemp bill after hundreds of protesters descend on legislature
- U.S. senator urges regulators to probe Wall Street banks over Epstein accounts
- NC hemp industry rallies against bill it calls a ban in disguise
- U.S. Supreme Court won’t halt $655M judgment against Palestinians over attacks
- Oklahoma court tosses conviction of YouTuber who went to prison for online rant
- DNA fight grows as civil suit advances in SC Murdaugh retrial
Legal Tech
- AI is reshaping family law practice, but attorneys worry about DIY research
- Massachusetts court rejects work product protection for AI documents by girlfriend
- Exterro launches on-premises AI platform for digital forensics
Commentary
- Legally Speaking: How communication failures turn disputes into lawsuits
- We tore out our own backup generator
- When is a PIP an adverse employment action?
- Legally Speaking: What spring can teach us about active listening
- A useful patent management government notice
- Opinion: NC judges have enormous power. Be sure to vote in November
- The third option: Why your best employees are quietly losing their edge
- AI divorce is real, but family law can still save itself










