Republicans who redrew boundaries for North Carolina legislative and congressional seats followed legal requirements and took partisanship into account while forming the maps, but race wasn't their overarching principle, attorneys defending the maps told judges Tuesday.
Attorneys for those who challenged North Carolina's boundaries for General Assembly and congressional seats began making arguments over the heart of the litigation Monday, accusing out-of-state mapmakers of creating lines that diminished the influence of black voters.
A three-judge panel has set aside two days next month to hear arguments whether new boundaries for North Carolina legislative and congressional districts should be thrown out or upheld.
The North Carolina state Supreme Court has sided with legislative leaders who withheld certain information received from state-funded private attorneys about redistricting maps in 2011, ruling that those documents can be confidential.
A legal motion by a coalition of civil rights groups claims voting districts drafted by the Republican-dominated North Carolina legislature disenfranchises black voters and asks a state court to declare the lines unconstitutional.
RALEIGH (AP) — The North Carolina Supreme Court today peppered attorneys involved in the latest round of redistricting with questions about whether certain documents generated by lawyers for the mapmakers are public or can remain confidential.
- Cooper allows budget to become law; Medicaid will expand
- Alabama fraternity faces hazing lawsuit
- Judge handling Trump case faces tremendous pressure
- VIDEO: 5 Questions With … Jan E. Pritchett
- Conflicted Appeals Court affirms removal of Superior Court clerk
- NC transgender health case might go to high court
- Murdaugh pleads guilty to financial crimes
- Alabama redistricting case before Supreme Court
- Band leader: ‘Doing my job’ when arrested
- Court orders part of abortion referendum rewritten
- VIDEO: Counsel’s focus firmly set on reproductive rights
- Lawsuit faults Google Maps in deadly crash
- Amotion sees resurgence after almost a decade
- The flip side of generative AI in law and how to address it
- The fight for equal educational opportunity continues
- Court’s term was rough on big business
- Ex-president, bar association have made their choice
- Ruling sharpens boundaries in attorney-client privilege
- Lawyers Weekly debuts new and improved web experience
- US Supreme Court bites back at parody’s use of the First Amendment
- Supreme Court leaves key internet protection untouched
- Case study: North Carolina courts provide guidance on scope, limitations of attorney-client privilege
- A Different Ode to Pro Bono Work
- A roadmap to attracting, developing, retaining great associates