In a Second, Parallel Filing, NC Legislative Leaders Ask US Supreme Court to Stay Mid-Election Rule Changes

Last week, legislative leaders sought injunction from U.S. Supreme Court through federal appellate process

Parallel case was also moving through state court, and today’s action is conclusion of the state case’s track

Bottom line: Both state and federal cases seeking to block mid-election rule changes are now with U.S. Supreme Court

Raleigh, N.C. — North Carolina Senate Leader Phil Berger and House Speaker Tim Moore today asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay approval of a secretive settlement deal that changed state election laws after voting already began.

The secretive settlement deal eliminated the witness requirement for absentee ballots and extended the deadline by which absentee ballots must be received to nine days after Election Day.

The deal was worked out in secret between the Democratic Party-controlled N.C. State Board of Elections, Democratic Attorney General Josh Stein, and Democratic Party super-lawyer Marc Elias.

It’s clear that the allied Democrats struck the deal in secret because Sen. Berger and Speaker Moore, who are co-defendants in the case, did not know about the existence of negotiations, much less a settlement, until the deal was publicly announced.

Attorney General Stein is on the ballot this year. He negotiated changes to the rules of his own election after ballots had already been cast. He has refused to turn over public records surrounding the negotiations with Marc Elias.

Read the full motion to the U.S. Supreme Court here.

Read a concise timeline and fact sheet on what’s happening here.

Last week, legislative leaders concluded a parallel track in federal court by asking the U.S. Supreme Court to issue an injunction of the mid-election rules changes agreed to in the secret settlement.

Today’s filing concludes the state court track. It’s likely the U.S. Supreme Court will rule on both simultaneously.