Democratic lawmakers in North Carolina introduced three constitutional amendments this week aimed at protecting the governor’s traditional powers and reforming oversight of the state’s court system.
The effort was spurred in part by ProPublica’s reporting, which included an investigation that found that for nearly a decade, Republican lawmakers had been passing one law after another that curtailed the power of North Carolina’s governor, then always a Democrat.
At a press conference Wednesday, the bill’s sponsors were quick to acknowledge that the initiative is unlikely to pass, at least not in the current Congress. Republicans hold majorities in North Carolina’s House and Senate.
But in proposing the measure as a change to the state constitution, a group of eight Democratic lawmakers said its purpose was to reduce vulnerability to persistent partisan fighting engulfing the narrowly divided battleground state.
Rep. Phil Rubin, one of the bill’s lead sponsors, said Republicans “are not always going to have a majority.” “When they don’t, all of a sudden they think this is a great rule. So let’s do it now.”
Republican leadership in the House, Senate and court system did not respond to requests for comment on the bill.
Experts have long argued that the Republican power grab has thwarted the will of North Carolina voters and stripped the Democratic governor of control or partial control over numerous boards, organizations and executive privileges, leaving him among the most vulnerable in the nation. (Republican officials defended the change, noting that voters also elected a Republican legislative majority.)
Mr. Rubin’s bill would prohibit the Legislature from taking away additional gubernatorial powers and prevent the majority leader from doing what he calls “government by ambush,” or introducing major legislation without prior notice to the minority or the general public.
“ProPublica’s reporting shows the dangers of not having this law in place,” Rubin said. Voters should be given “an opportunity to uphold the Constitution, demand absolute transparency in legislation, and ensure that the people, not backroom deals, have the final say.”
Two other constitutional amendments announced this week target aspects of the judicial system.
The first, written by Congresswoman Marcia Morley, exposes disciplinary hearings and sanctions by the Judicial Standards Commission, an internal court watchdog.
Currently, Republican rules keep the committee’s activities secret. Behind closed doors, ProPublica revealed that the Republican-controlled state Supreme Court reversed a committee’s recommendation to publicly discipline two Republican judges who found egregious conduct violations. (Spokespeople for the North Carolina Supreme Court and the Judicial Standards Commission declined to comment or answer a detailed list of questions on this issue.)
Morley’s bill would also change who appoints the commission’s members, an important step to prevent the “weaponization” of the commission’s work, she said.
Currently, Republican legislative leaders and the state’s conservative Chief Justice Paul Newby appoint the majority of the commission’s members. As ProPublica reported, Newby encouraged the commission in 2023 to investigate a Black Democratic judge who criticized his decision to effectively shut down the Commission on Racial Equality. (Mr Newby and a spokesperson for the Courts and Judicial Standards Commission declined to comment for this story.)
Morley’s bill would split commission appointments evenly between the chief justice, the governor and the North Carolina State Bar. She said “who makes discipline decisions and who appoints decision-makers” is important to making the system “fair and effective.”
A second bill, sponsored by Rep. Deb Butler, would disqualify state Supreme Court justices from hearing cases involving families. Judge Phil Berger Jr. has courted controversy with his rulings in several cases in which his father, the state Senate majority leader, is a legislative defendant. (Mr. Berger referred his request to dismiss these cases to the Supreme Court’s Republican majority, which ruled that Mr. Berger could participate.)
Butler’s action would also force judges to disclose more information about large stock transactions, outside sources of income and sponsored travel. ProPublica’s investigation found that Mr. Newby did not disclose a trip to a luxury resort in Hawaii that was paid for by a conservative judicial education program. Mr. Newby and a court spokeswoman did not respond to requests for comment about his decision not to publicize the trip.
Butler described her bill as an effort to restore public trust. “People should have complete confidence in the integrity of the court,” she says.
If the bill passes, the public will have the opportunity to vote on it in November. If not, sponsors said they would reinstate it next session, by which time even some Republican strategists believe a blue wave may have flipped the North Carolina House of Representatives.
“We are committed to pursuing these bills to ensure fairness and impartiality in our courts and legislatures,” Morley said. “This should be the norm, not the partisan bias that it is now.”
