Closing arguments were recently heard in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina in the state’s contentious redistricting lawsuit, and now many are awaiting the outcome.
In North Carolina NAACP v. Berger, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People -- the nation's oldest and largest civil rights organization – and other groups like Common Cause North Carolina argued that the state's redistricting plans were unconstitutional and were drawn to minimize the influence of minority voters and create partisan advantages for the Republican party.
Common Cause North Carolina is a non-partisan, pro-democracy organization. Bob Phillips is the Executive Director.
“We're very optimistic about having a favorable ruling and the relief we are seeking,” he said, “And that is, obviously, to have new fair maps for the 2026 election.”
GOP state lawmakers redrew the challenged maps in 2023 after the state Supreme Court reversed a previous high court decision that found Republican lawmakers violated the state Constitution by drawing maps in 2022 that were skewed by excessive partisanship.
Republican defendants have maintained they relied on traditional redistricting criteria in making up the latest maps and that the plans stay within the bounds of acceptable partisan considerations…and don’t amount to racial gerrymandering. But Phillips, and the lawsuit, say otherwise.
“In eastern North Carolina, unquestionably African American communities are cracked for the purposes of diluting their vote,” Phillips said. “That then entrenches the power of the party that is drawing the map.”
Testimony about congressional districts focused mainly on the Piedmont Triad region and Mecklenburg County, but areas of northeastern and southeastern North Carolina and one district in ENC were also disputed.
During the trial, a lawyer for the NC NAACP and Common Cause said the configuration of the 1st Congressional District in eastern North Carolina had a disproportionate impact on Black voters and their ability to elect candidates of their choice.
The district has elected a Black representative since 1992, and the redrawn version is the first since then to exclude Pitt County. Parts of Greenville were removed from the district and majority-white coastal counties were added.
Democratic U.S. Rep. Don Davis won in the redrawn district by a narrow margin in November.
Attorneys said Republicans divided counties known as the “Black Belt” in violation of the federal Voting Rights Act, and the region now has one Black state senator when there had previously been two or three.
Phillips said the lawsuit is about more than lines on a map, but meeting the needs of the minority community. “What they need regarding the schools and environment and transportation, their voice is not there when they don't have representation,” he explained.
North Carolina's redistricting process occurs every ten years following the U.S. census. It has been marked by frequent legal challenges and changes to the maps used for electing representatives, and Phillips said a systemic change is necessary.
"We would never have to go through this if we had a better process,” he said, “The problem, of course, ultimately is that lawmakers draw their own districts, they do it to entrench their power. Democrats certainly did it when they were in control. Republicans are doing it today and they have the benefit of sophisticated technology to even be more precise about it. But as long as we allow the lawmakers to draw their own districts, we will continue to have this problem.”
According to BallotPedia, North Carolina is one of 33 states in which legislatures play the dominant role in congressional redistricting. In nine states, commissions draw congressional district lines, and in two states a hybrid system, in which the legislatures share redistricting authority with commissions, are used. The remaining states only have one congressional district, rendering redistricting unnecessary.
Phillips said either ruling will significantly impact the midterm elections. It has to be made before candidate filing begins in December, and the three judges involved have said they will make a decision before that deadline. All three were appointed by Republican presidents.
