Republicans in both states moved to enact new voting measures after the Supreme Court in 2013 struck down a provision of the federal Voting Rights Act that had required them to get advance approval before changing laws dealing with elections. We need to be making it easier to vote, not harder - and the Court found this law sought to discriminate against African-American voters with "surgical precision".
The New Hanover County Board of Elections displays the NC Voter ID Laws.
"This law, enacted with what the appeals court called discriminatory intent and "almost surgical precision" targeting African-American voters, is meeting its much-deserved demise", Dale Ho, director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, said in a written statement.
FILE North Carolina voters wait in line outside a library in Asheville on Super Tuesday, March 15, 2016. The 4th Circuit ruling highlighted how North Carolina's law had restrictions of procedures that heavily affect African Americans to the benefit of one political party and to the disadvantage of the other.
The Supreme Court opted not to hear the case, thereby leaving in place a ruling by a federal appeals court that had struck down key parts of the legislation enacted by the Republican-dominated state legislature in 2013.
The case fell foul of procedural stumbling blocks, after North Carolina's Republican governor was ousted by a Democrat whose new attorney general opposed the passage of the law.
A certiorari order refers to the act of at least four Supreme Court Justices determining the circumstances described in the appeal are sufficient to be reviewed by the Supreme Court. "But there's no higher court than the Supreme Court, this effectively ends Supreme Court case 16-833".
The justices' decision not to take up a Republican appeal in the important voting rights dispute set no legal precedent and did not rule out the possibility that the court, with a 5-4 conservative majority, would endorse such laws in future.
A man votes in November in Durham, N.C. The U.S. Supreme Court had refused to reinstate strict voter restrictions in time for Election Day.
Critics said the commission would justify voter suppression efforts, while state election officials are anxious it could "divert attention from other serious concerns, such as aging equipment and the threat of hacking", she wrote.
The law also eliminated same-day voter registration, and significantly reduced the number of early voting days. The justices declined to review that decision, though Chief Justice John Roberts noted in a statement that not all of them agreed with the lower court's ruling.
United States history is littered with voting restrictions on minorities, even though the 1965 Voting Rights Act banned any such discrimination along racial lines.
This development doesn't answer any fundamental questions about the constitutionality of voter verification requirements or the long-term status of North Carolina's voter program.
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Monday announced that it would stay out of a fight over a restrictive North Carolina voting law. "That charge is incredible on its face given the pains the legislature took to ensure that no one's right to vote would be abridged".