Former N.C. justices urge successors to avoid forced removal | Beaufort County Now | Three former N.C. Supreme Court justices, all Republicans, are urging the current court not to move forward with forcibly removing colleagues from a high-profile voter ID case.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
    Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the Carolina Journal. The author of this post is CJ Staff.

N.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Mark Martin, right, delivers remarks during the Jan. 7, 2019, celebration of the court's 200th anniversary. Senior Associate Justice Paul Newby listens.

    Three former N.C. Supreme Court justices, all Republicans, are urging the current court not to move forward with forcibly removing colleagues from a high-profile voter ID case. They make their argument in a friend-of-the-court brief filed Wednesday.

    "Procedures matter. They matter to the parties and their advocates. They matter to the public. And they matter to this honorable Court," write former Chief Justice Mark Martin and former Associate Justices Robert Edmunds and Barbara Jackson.

    "Plaintiff invites this Court to depart from established procedures in two extraordinary ways," the former justices add. "First, it asks this Court to eschew nearly 50 years of consistent practice and adopt a new rule for determining recusal and disqualification. Second, it asks this Court to do so in connection with a specific case - and not as part of its administrative rule-making process."

    "The Court should begin by scrutinizing the impact that allowing this motion would have on the public's perception of its independence, integrity, and impartiality," the justices write.

    "Adopting a policy that allows a certain number of justices to require the involuntary recusal of one or more of their colleagues in this case threatens to upend these core principles. Absent a compelling reason for this departure from custom, the public likely would conclude that the rule change is motivated by its anticipated impact on the case's outcome."

    The former justices urge the Supreme Court to "decline plaintiff's invitation" for two reasons. First, there is no "compelling reason" to adopt a new procedure for forced removal of justices.

    "Second, departing from the longstanding rule in the middle of a specific case would erode public trust and confidence in our courts," the former justices write. "This Court should not impose upon itself such a high price. Prudence counsels strongly in favor of retaining the established rule during the pendency of a specific case."

    The court's existing recusal procedure allows individual justices to decide for themselves when they should avoid hearing a case. "If this longstanding recusal procedure is to be revised, the full Court with all seven members participating should do so only in administrative session without any nexus to a particular case," the former justices argue.

    The friend-of-the-court brief arrived as parties on both sides submitted final briefs in the case NAACP v. Moore. The case will decide whether two state constitutional amendments adopted in 2018 will stand. One guarantees voter ID for elections. The other lowers the state's existing cap on income tax rates.

    Plaintiffs in the case have asked the Supreme Court to remove two Republican justices - Tamara Barringer and Phil Berger Jr. - against their will. Carolina Journal has documented the case's developments at
Go Back


Latest Op-Ed & Politics

The World, the "President's" constituents, and America's patriots got a full on dose of something not witnessed in my lifetime - the roadmap for the dissolution of a presidency, and as intellectually frail as it might have appeared, it is now in the pronounced period of dénouement.
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said on Tuesday that the situation in Eastern Europe has grown so dire that “we are now at a stage where Russia could at any point launch an attack in Ukraine.”


Writing "In God We Trust" on his cars and trying to buy loyalty and silence with arbitrary raises and position reclassifications will only keep maligned staff quiet for a short while.
Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis slammed Democrat President Joe Biden in remarks this week during an interview, saying that there were a lot of problems around the country with “Brandon,” a name used to mock Biden, in office.


Jeffrey Epstein, the wealthy pedophile who was found dead in his New York City jail cell in 2019 as he faced new criminal charges, reportedly visited then-President Bill Clinton’s White House numerous times and brought several women.


Back to Top