Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

N.C. and NAACP agree on this much: Too late to demand photo IDs on Super Tuesday

N.C. and NAACP agree on this much: Too late to demand photo IDs on Super Tuesday
Sara D. Davis/Getty Images

One month from North Carolina's potentially pivotal primary, the battle over making voters abide by one of the country's strictest photo ID laws is not close to done.

Last week lawyers for both the NAACP and the state urged a federal judge to hold fast to her decision to block the law from being implemented March 3, when the state's 110 Democratic delegates are the third-biggest prize on what's dubbed Super Tuesday. Lifting it so close to the balloting would cause chaos and confusion for voters, attorneys generally on opposite sides of voting rights issues in the state agreed.

The fight over the law has emerged as one of the premier voting rights cases in the country ahead of the 2020 presidential election.


Their briefs, filed Friday, came in response to a last-minute effort by top Republicans in charge of the General Assembly to persuade U.S. District Judge Loretta Biggs to change her mind in time for the primary. In December she blocked the voter ID law from taking effect at least until after a trial to decide the statute's ultimate fate.

North Carolina voters approved a ballot measure in 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 him. Civil rights groups quickly filed suit, arguing the law disproportionately harms African-American voters.

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," the judge said in putting a halt to the law.

Following Biggs' injunction, Republican state in the state House and Senate filed a motion with the court, requesting that the injunction be lifted ahead of the primary. North Carolina is among 16 states and territories where Democrats will declare their presidential favorite on March 3. Only California and Texas offer more delegates.

On Friday, lawyers from the state attorney general's office responded, saying such a move would be reckless, seeing as hundreds of absentee ballots have already been returned by voters, and those ballots would be subject to provisions of the proposed photo ID mandate. Early voting also begins next week.

The State Board of Elections "has taken a number of specific measures to comply with the court's order, and it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, and confusing to the public, to unwind many of these actions in an orderly way if the order were stayed," the state's lawyers said.

Read More

A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

The Supreme Court’s stay in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem restores ICE authority in Los Angeles, igniting national debate over racial profiling, constitutional rights, and immigration enforcement.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

Public Safety or Profiling? Implications of Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem for Immigration Enforcement in the U.S.

Introduction

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in September 2025 to stay a lower court’s order in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem marks a significant development in the ongoing debate over the balance between immigration enforcement and constitutional protections. The decision temporarily lifted a district court’s restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the Los Angeles area, allowing agents to resume certain enforcement practices while litigation continues. Although the decision does not resolve the underlying constitutional issues, it does have significant implications for immigration policy, law enforcement authority, and civil liberties.

Keep ReadingShow less
For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

Praying outdoors

ImagineGolf/Getty Images

For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

The American experiment has been sustained not by flawless execution of its founding ideals but by the moral imagination of people who refused to surrender hope. From abolitionists to suffragists to the foot soldiers of the civil-rights movement, generations have insisted that the Republic live up to its creed. Yet today that hope feels imperiled. Coarsened public discourse, the normalization of cruelty in policy, and the corrosion of democratic trust signal more than political dysfunction—they expose a crisis of meaning.

Naming that crisis is not enough. What we need, I argue, is a recovered ethic of humaneness—a civic imagination rooted in empathy, dignity, and shared responsibility. Eric Liu, through Citizens University and his "Civic Saturday" fellows and gatherings, proposes that democracy requires a "civic religion," a shared set of stories and rituals that remind us who we are and what we owe one another. I find deep resonance between that vision and what I call humane theology. That is, a belief and moral framework that insists public life cannot flourish when empathy is starved.

Keep ReadingShow less