RALEIGH, N.C. _ Racial discrimination was at least part of the motivation for a new voter ID law in North Carolina, a federal judge wrote Tuesday, striking the law down for now.
The judge's ruling Tuesday said that parts of the new voter ID law "were impermissibly motivated, at least in part, by discriminatory intent."
The last time North Carolina's Republican-led General Assembly passed a voter ID law, in 2013, it was also struck down for racial discrimination. However, GOP leaders have repeatedly said they believed this newer version of the law, which was passed a year ago, avoided the racial issues the previous law ran into.
The federal district court judge hearing this case over the new law disagreed.
She wrote that "racial discrimination and racial polarization have historically pervaded North Carolina's political climate _ and still do."
Her ruling means that although voters statewide approved a voter ID amendment to the state constitution in the 2018 elections, people most likely will be able to vote without showing ID in at least the March primary election.
The issue of the general election in November is still unsettled, since it's possible this issue could go to trial before then. Biggs wrote that "no voter ID will be required in the upcoming election cycle unless otherwise ordered by the Court."
The lawsuit was filed last year by the North Carolina NAACP against state government leaders including Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper and the members of the State Board of Elections. Cooper has opposed voter ID in the past, however _ he vetoed the law, unsuccessfully, when the Legislature passed it in a lame-duck session in December 2018 _ and Republican lawmakers have said they're concerned about the law being rigorously defended by the state, since they're not part of the lawsuit.
Biggs announced last week that this decision would be coming soon.
After she did so, North Carolina Senate leader Phil Berger, a Republican from Rockingham County, criticized her and called on Democratic Attorney General Josh Stein to appeal her decision.
"This last-ditch effort from an unelected judge to stymie the implementation of voter ID and prohibit the Legislature from defending the law it wrote is inappropriate," Berger said. "Legislative leaders have worked in good faith to accept numerous forms of IDs and allow for certain exclusions. The result is one of the most lenient voter ID laws in the nation."
