Federal Court Strikes Down North Carolina’s Voter ID Law Due To “Racial Discriminatory Intent”


north carolina voter id lawA federal appeals court just struck down North Carolina’s new requirements that voters must show specific photo identification and follow other rules that disproportionately affected minorities, saying that the new laws deliberately “target African-Americans with almost surgical precision” in an attempt to decrease black turnout at the polls.

The new law stipulated that a drivers license, state issued ID card, passport, military or Native American card would be required for a person to vote. It basically stopped the 318,000 registered North Carolina voters — disproportionately African-Americans and Latinos — that do not have a driver’s license, state issued, military, or tribal ID card. (birth certificates, social security cards, bank statements, or other forms of ID were no longer accepted). The law also stopped early voting and same-day registration.

The appeals court cited data that these methods were used disproportionately by black voters.

In 2012, 70 percent of black voters used early voting — and cast ballots at a slightly higher percentage than whites. Although black voters made up about 20 percent of the electorate, they made up 41 percent of voters who used same-day registration.

The new 2013 ‘Voter ID’ law was created in an attempt to stop voter impersonation, however, there was never any evidence of voter impersonation that might justify the voter ID requirements established by the new law.

When the law was originally passed in 2013, a former NC Republican Chairman even stated, “If it hurts a bunch of lazy blacks that want the government to give them everything, so be it…”

don yelton racial comments nc voter id

Today’s ruling from the three-judge panel states that “the legislature enacted one of the largest restrictions of the franchise in modern North Carolina history” when it rewrote voting laws in 2013.

The ruling also stated that, “While it is of course true that “history did not end in 1965,” id., it is equally true that SL 2013-381 imposes the first meaningful restrictions on voting access since that date — and a comprehensive set of restrictions at that. Due to this fact, and because the legislation came into being literally within days of North Carolina’s release from the preclearance requirements of the Voting Rights Act, that long-ago history bears more heavily here than it might otherwise. Failure to so recognize would risk allowing that troubled history to “pick up where it left off in 1965” to the detriment of African American voters in North Carolina. LWV, 769 F.3d at 242.” – on page 32 of the published federal court documents.

The judges wrote that in the years before the North Carolina law took effect, registration and participation by black voters had been dramatically increasing.

“We recognize that elections have consequences, but winning an election does not empower anyone in any party to engage in purposeful racial discrimination,” the panel said.



Lover of tacos, tea, cute journals & bearded Joseph. Queen City story teller and video maker.


  1. This is absolutely ridiculous.
    Folks you need I.D. To:
    Serve in the Military
    Restricted areas
    Age Restricted functions, products and services.
    Travel abroad
    If you do any of the above you have I.D.
    If you don’t have I.D. You can get it from the D.M.V. With PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP, ie, Your Social Security Number. If you are an invalid or can’t find your way to the DMV, you can apply online with YOUR PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP.
    Almost EVERY OTHER Country in the World is the same
    If you need I.D. For all the above.
    Why on G-ds Green Earth would you not have I.D. To prove you are a naturalized citizen to vote for the government of your country?!
    Geez people. I’m originally from Canada, one of the most liberal countries in the world, and we need I.D. to vote!
    Are you too lazy to get I.D.? No, I think some; even in the Fed, are encouraging ILLEGALS to commit voter fraud.
    There is no Other excuse and to even to debate it is just plain idiocy!
    The judges who voted against this need their heads examined.