Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Citing history of racial discrimination, judge blocks North Carolina voter ID law

Voter ID law on hold

A federal judge in North Carolina has put a hold on a law that would have required voters to show an ID at the polls.

Getty Images

A federal judge has blocked implementation of a new voter identification law set to go into effect in North Carolina, claiming Republican state legislators who authored the bill were intending racial discrimination.

U.S. District Judge Loretta Biggs noted in her ruling on Tuesday that North Carolina "has a sordid history of racial discrimination and voter suppression stretching back to the time of slavery, through the era of Jim Crow, and, crucially, continuing up to the present day."

Biggs blocked use of the voter ID requirement until there is a trial. That, in effect, means North Carolina voters won't have to present an ID when they vote in the state's March 3 primary elections.


North Carolina voters approved a ballot measure in November 2018 requiring voters to produce an ID when they cast their ballots. The GOP-controlled Legislature passed a bill the next month to implement the ballot measure. It was vetoed by the Democratic governor, Roy Cooper, but the Legislature overrode the veto.

The North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and several local NAACP chapters immediately filed a federal lawsuit challenging the law and asking for an injunction to block its implementation.

Biggs ruled that the same GOP state legislators who were behind earlier voter ID legislation that a federal appeals court found was intended to discriminate against black voters were involved in the most recent voter ID law.

She concluded that there was enough evidence that the new law, "like its predecessor, was imbued with discriminatory intent."

Because North Carolina has a history of discrimination, parts of the state had been subject to restrictions under the federal Voting Rights Act. Any changes to voting systems were required to receive advance approval, called "preclearance," by a federal judge or the Justice Department.

But that preclearance requirement was struck down by the Supreme Court in a landmark 2013 ruling. The court found that the evidence used to justify the preclearance requirement was out of date.


Read More

California Voters Don’t Like Either Party. Good Thing the Primary Doesn’t Belong to The Parties.

California voters increasingly distrust both major parties. Here's why the state's Top Two primary gives independent voters more power to shape elections.

Image: Duncan Shelby on Alamy.

California Voters Don’t Like Either Party. Good Thing the Primary Doesn’t Belong to The Parties.

SAN DIEGO, Calif. - California voters have already received ballots for the June 2 primary, and the message they have going into these elections may not be what the political class wants to hear: They are not thrilled with either major party.

A recent analysis from the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) found that majorities of likely voters have unfavorable views of both parties—61% unfavorable toward the Democratic Party and 70% unfavorable toward the Republican Party.

Keep ReadingShow less
Demonstrators hold signs during a January 6th memorial march in Washington, DC.

Demonstrators hold signs during a January 6th memorial march marking five years since the attack on January 06, 2026 in Washington, DC

Win McNamee / Getty Images

America at 250: A Nation Drifting from Its Ideals—As Unchecked Power Corrupts

As the nation approaches its 250th Anniversary, Americans should be entering a moment of pride, reckoning, and aspiration — honoring our founding ideals, confronting our injustices, and committing to a shared, inclusive future. But millions cannot reach that place. They are living in a country where the most basic democratic promise — that no one, not even the president, is above the law — is no longer true. And they are asking a question no democracy should ever force its people to ask: How do you confront injustice when leaders erase the history, hide the evidence, excuse the wrongdoing, and protect the perpetrators?

People are watching January 6 perpetrators not only be pardoned, but now discussed as victims deserving compensation — while others who committed far lesser offenses remain in prison. They are watching families who lost loved ones, officers who were attacked, and judges who were threatened receive no acknowledgment, while those who carried out the violence are elevated. They are watching Epstein victims still seeking closure while Maxwell lives comfortably. And they are watching Congress and the courts fail to check a president who intimidates, retaliates, enriches himself, and bends institutions to serve him.

Keep ReadingShow less
Businessman on ladder arranging large, multicolored speech bubbles on blue background

Pluralism has a messaging problem. Explore how body metaphors shape politics, exclusion, diversity, and democratic governance across difference.


Malte Mueller / Getty Images

We Need a New Metaphor of Us

Pluralism has a messaging problem. Part of the reason why is that there is no common emotionally intuitive metaphor for the collaborative co-creation of governance across differences that is a pluralistic democracy.

This matters because humans do not think politically through abstract principles alone — we think through metaphor.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Fragile Coalitions Beneath American Politics
white concrete building during daytime

The Fragile Coalitions Beneath American Politics

Part 1 of “Today’s Governing Gap,” a three-part series on coalition fragility, governing coherence, and the institutional continuity democratic systems require.

American politics looks stable from a distance. Two dominant parties, fiercely competitive elections, a constitutional framework that has held since the Civil War.

Keep ReadingShow less