Voter ID Trial Day 2: Plaintiffs’ SECOND Expert Witness Admits He Didn’t Know an African American Democrat SPONSORED the “Racist” Bill
Yesterday’s witness admitted she didn’t know the bill sponsors and didn’t even read the bill before writing her “expert report”
Second expert witness today admitted he, too, had no idea that an African American Democrat sponsored the voter ID bill; conceded he found no evidence of discriminatory intent
New testimony further cements reality that the anti-voter ID case is based on nothing but fiery rhetoric and baseless smears
Raleigh, N.C. — North Carolina’s 2018 voter ID law is on trial this week (read a summary of the law here). For the second day in a row, an “expert witness” admitted that he didn’t know an African American Democrat sponsored the voter ID bill that the plaintiffs are calling “racist.”
Yesterday, a different expert witness also admitted she didn’t know that African American Democratic Sen. Joel Ford sponsored the voter ID bill in question, and she also said she didn’t even read the bill text.
Lawyers for the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, a left-wing legal organization, called today’s expert witness, Professor James Leloudis, to testify in their effort to convince the panel of judges that the law sponsored by an African American Democrat is racist.
But during questioning, Prof. Leloudis admitted he didn’t even know that an African American Democrat sponsored the bill:
- Lawyer: “In writing your report, you did not know who Sen. Joel Ford was, did you?”
- Prof. Leloudis: “I don’t think Joel Ford actually came to mind in the report.”
- Lawyer: “When you were writing your report, you weren’t aware that he was a primary sponsor, were you?”
- Prof. Leloudis: “No I did not know that.”
Prof. Leloudis also conceded that he’s aware of no evidence that the voter ID bill was passed with any discriminatory intent:
- Lawyer: “You’re not aware of any racial appeals made directly about SB824, correct?”
- Prof. Leloudis: “Directly? No.”
- Lawyer: “You’re not aware of any racial appeals that a legislator in the General Assembly made with respect to SB824, correct?”
- Prof. Leloudis: “That’s correct.”
- Lawyer: “You’re not aware of any legislator stating he or she was voting to place the voter ID amendment on the ballot for discriminatory reasons, correct?”
- Prof. Leloudis: “Nothing directly connected to the legislation, no.”
- Lawyer: “You’re not aware of any evidence that any particular legislator voted for SB824 for discriminatory reasons, right?”
- Prof. Leloudis: “Express discriminatory reasons? I am not aware.”
The testimony offered by two consecutive “expert witnesses” reveals the anti-voter ID case is based on nothing but fiery rhetoric and baseless smears.