Motion to dismiss own appeal—denied—legislative redistricting plans—constitutionality—applicability to future elections—In a case involving legislative redistricting plans, where legislative defendants appealed to the Supreme Court from the trial court's ruling regarding the constitutionality of remedial redistricting maps, but then filed a motion to dismiss their own appeal on the basis that the election to which the remedial maps primarily applied had already taken place, the Supreme Court denied the motion–after noting that it had been filed just after legislative defendants' petition for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court was granted–in order to resolve an issue of great significance to the jurisprudence of this state. Harper v. Hall , 380 N.C. 317 (2022) (Author: Justice Robin Hudson)

Legislative redistricting—constitutional compliance—whether fundamental right to substantially equal voting power is protected—The Supreme Court reaffirmed the constitutional standard articulated in Harper v. Hall, 380 N.C. 317 (2022), that, in order for redistricting maps to satisfy constitutional requirements, they must uphold voters' fundamental rights to vote on equal terms and to have substantially equal voting power. Assessment of evidence under this standard requires a broad consideration of constitutionality rather than a narrow focus on any particular statistical datapoints. Harper v. Hall , 380 N.C. 317 (2022) (Author: Justice Robin Hudson)

Legislative redistricting—remedial congressional plan—lacking constitutional compliance—remedy—The trial court's determination that the legislature's proposed remedial congressional redistricting plan (RCP) did not meet the constitutional standard of protecting voters' fundamental rights to vote on equal terms and to substantially equal voting power–and therefore failed strict scrutiny–was supported by the court's findings of fact, which were in turn supported by competent evidence regarding the plan's partisan asymmetry. The trial court's adoption of the appointed Special Masters' proposed modified RCP was an appropriate remedy pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 120-2.4(a1), and the court's determination that the modified RCP satisfied the constitutional standard was supported by its findings of fact and competent evidence. Harper v. Hall , 380 N.C. 317 (2022) (Author: Justice Robin Hudson)

Legislative redistricting—remedial plans—equal protection challenge—threshold constitutional standard—In a legislative redistricting case in which, after remand, the trial court approved the legislature's proposed remedial house redistricting plan (RHP), an equal protection challenge to that plan–on the grounds that the plan would lead to vote dilution for Black voters–had no merit because the trial court's determination that the RHP satisfied the constitutional standard of upholding voters' fundamental right to vote on equal terms–which involved equal protection principles–was supported by the court's findings of fact, which were in turn supported by competent evidence, including that the legislature conducted a racially polarized voting analysis which demonstrated that the remedial plan was constitutionally sufficient. Harper v. Hall , 380 N.C. 317 (2022) (Author: Justice Robin Hudson)

Legislative redistricting—remedial state house plan—satisfaction of constitutional standards—The trial court's approval of the legislature's proposed remedial state house redistricting plan (RHP)–after determining that the RHP complied with constitutional standards by protecting voters' fundamental rights to vote on equal terms and to substantially equal voting power and was therefore presumptively constitutional–was supported by the court's unchallenged findings of fact, which were in turn supported by competent evidence. Harper v. Hall , 380 N.C. 317 (2022) (Author: Justice Robin Hudson)

Legislative redistricting—remedial state senate plan—lacking compliance with constitutional standards—remand required—The Supreme Court reversed the trial court's order approving the legislature's proposed remedial state senate redistricting plan (RSP) where certain of the trial court's findings were not supported by competent evidence and other findings served to undermine, rather than support, the trial court's conclusion that the RSP was presumptively constitutional. The matter was remanded to the trial court to oversee the creation of a modified RSP that satisfies the constitutional standard regarding partisan symmetry. Harper v. Hall , 380 N.C. 317 (2022) (Author: Justice Robin Hudson)

Legislative redistricting—special masters and advisors—denial of motion to disqualify—abuse of discretion analysis—After the Supreme Court determined that redistricting maps constituted illegal partisan gerrymanders and remanded to the trial court to oversee the redrawing of those maps, and after the trial court appointed special masters to assist it in evaluating the legislature's proposed remedial maps, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the legislative defendants' motion to disqualify two of the special masters' advisors, who had a limited role in shaping the special masters' recommendations and whose ex parte communications with the special masters were due to expediency and involved only publicly available information. Harper v. Hall , 380 N.C. 317 (2022) (Author: Justice Robin Hudson)