Judges To Hire Expert To Aid Evaluating North Carolina Districts

Nine North Carolina legislative districts redrawn by the Republican-controlled General Assembly over the summer still may be unlawful, a federal court said Thursday while announcing it planned to hire an outside expert to evaluate them and possibly retool them again.

A three-judge panel, which last year determined that 28 of the 170 state House and Senate districts approved in 2011 were illegal racial gerrymanders, say problems remain in the latest version of the legislative maps.

In an order signed by one of the judges, the panel identified four districts that lawyers for the voters who sued originally over the 2011 maps argue hadn't been rid of racial bias and five districts the attorneys contend violate the North Carolina Constitution.

"The court is concerned (the districts) either fail to remedy the identified constitutional violation or are otherwise legally unacceptable," the order signed by U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles reads. The order also says the panel will appoint Stanford University law professor Nathan Persily as a "special master" to evaluate the districts and redraw again them if necessary.

Lawyers for legislative leaders had argued in court documents and in a hearing two weeks ago that the legislative districts approved in late August satisfied the judges' directives and that the court should sign off on them for 2018 elections. They said no racial data was used to help draw the maps.

The boundaries are important because the 2011 districts helped Republicans expand and retain veto-proof majorities that pushed through a conservative agenda on taxes, education and social issues.

District-by-district statewide election results attached to the latest maps projected Republicans had a good chance to retain their supermajorities in 2018. But redrawing the two Senate districts and seven House districts cites Thursday could improve odds for Democrats to pick up seats and influence. Districts surrounding the nine also would have to be altered.

Eagles cited the upcoming February candidate filing period and the "technical nature" of redistricting for hiring Persily, who has assisted judges drawing districts in New York, Connecticut, Georgia and Maryland.

Eagles gave both sides in the case a couple of days to express objections to his hiring, if any. He would be paid $500 per hour. The panel, which includes U.S. Circuit Judge Jim Wynn and District Judge Thomas Schroeder, had given the two sides the option to provide names of possible special masters, but they couldn't agree.

Republican legislative leaders didn't immediately respond Thursday to the order.

Anita Earls, a lawyer for the voters who initially sued over the districts, said "it has been shown time and again that the state legislature refuses to draw fair districts that comply with the law. Our clients are hopeful that this process will result in fair districts for all North Carolinians."

State Democratic Party Chair Wayne Goodwin called the order "a stunning rebuke of Republican legislators."

Nearly all of the 2011 districts challenged by North Carolina voters in a lawsuit had majority-black voting age populations.

Critics of the 2011 maps contend black voters were packed in districts so that surrounding districts would be more white and Republican. Republicans said that wasn't their goal, but rather to avoid voting rights litigation by creating majority-black districts when possible.

Earls argued five of the new districts violated the state Constitution's prohibition against mid-decade redistricting because they weren't touching the 28 districts that had been struck down.

Nine North Carolina legislative districts redrawn by the Republican-controlled General Assembly over the summer still may be unlawful, a federal court said Thursday while announcing it planned to hire an outside expert to evaluate them and possibly retool them again.

A three-judge panel, which last year determined that 28 of the 170 state House and Senate districts approved in 2011 were illegal racial gerrymanders, say problems remain in the latest version of the legislative maps.

In an order signed by one of the judges, the panel identified four districts that lawyers for the voters who sued originally over the 2011 maps argue hadn't been rid of racial bias and five districts the attorneys contend violate the North Carolina Constitution.

"The court is concerned (the districts) either fail to remedy the identified constitutional violation or are otherwise legally unacceptable," the order signed by U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles reads. The order also says the panel will appoint Stanford University law professor Nathan Persily as a "special master" to evaluate the districts and redraw again them if necessary.

Lawyers for legislative leaders had argued in court documents and in a hearing two weeks ago that the legislative districts approved in late August satisfied the judges' directives and that the court should sign off on them for 2018 elections. They said no racial data was used to help draw the maps.

The boundaries are important because the 2011 districts helped Republicans expand and retain veto-proof majorities that pushed through a conservative agenda on taxes, education and social issues.

District-by-district statewide election results attached to the latest maps projected Republicans had a good chance to retain their supermajorities in 2018. But redrawing the two Senate districts and seven House districts cites Thursday could improve odds for Democrats to pick up seats and influence. Districts surrounding the nine also would have to be altered.

Eagles cited the upcoming February candidate filing period and the "technical nature" of redistricting for hiring Persily, who has assisted judges drawing districts in New York, Connecticut, Georgia and Maryland.

Eagles gave both sides in the case a couple of days to express objections to his hiring, if any. He would be paid $500 per hour. The panel, which includes U.S. Circuit Judge Jim Wynn and District Judge Thomas Schroeder, had given the two sides the option to provide names of possible special masters, but they couldn't agree.

Republican legislative leaders didn't immediately respond Thursday to the order.

Anita Earls, a lawyer for the voters who initially sued over the districts, said "it has been shown time and again that the state legislature refuses to draw fair districts that comply with the law. Our clients are hopeful that this process will result in fair districts for all North Carolinians."

State Democratic Party Chair Wayne Goodwin called the order "a stunning rebuke of Republican legislators."

Nearly all of the 2011 districts challenged by North Carolina voters in a lawsuit had majority-black voting age populations.

Critics of the 2011 maps contend black voters were packed in districts so that surrounding districts would be more white and Republican. Republicans said that wasn't their goal, but rather to avoid voting rights litigation by creating majority-black districts when possible.

Earls argued five of the new districts violated the state Constitution's prohibition against mid-decade redistricting because they weren't touching the 28 districts that had been struck down.

This story has been updated from an earlier version.