NC House committee approves bills on death penalty, concealed carry, and immigration

Yahoo

30-04-2025

The North Carolina Legislative Building as it appeared on March 14, 2025. (Photo: Brandon Kingdollar/NC Newsline)
A North Carolina House committee advanced nearly a dozen bills in a two-hour session Tuesday afternoon as the General Assembly nears the crossover deadline for bills to pass at least one chamber of the legislature.
Many of the bills approved by the House Judiciary 2 Committee touched on controversial issues and drew concerns from members of advocacy groups during public comment, with bills prohibiting homeless encampments and requiring parents to be informed about minors' health care garnering extended discussion.
Several of the passed proposals focused on criminal punishment and the state's capacity for retributive justice. Lawmakers voted in favor of a bill that would once again allow for death by firing squad and electric chair in North Carolina with the aim of resuming death row executions that have been under effective moratorium since 2006.
Undocumented immigrants were a particular focus of Tuesday's meeting, with the committee voting in favor of one bill aimed at increasing the level of felony convictions when the defendant is in the United States without authorization and another directing health and housing agencies, social services, and public universities to verify individuals' immigration status.
The flurry of bills owes to the upcoming General Assembly crossover deadline of May 8. Bills that do not pass either the House or the Senate by that point are formally required to wait until 2027 for renewed consideration, though in practice, legislative maneuvers allow some bills to bypass this deadline.
The Judiciary 2 Committee advanced a proposal with the goal of bypassing the two-decade pause on executions in North Carolina, allowing death row inmates a choice between a firing squad, electrocution, and chemical injection.
House Bill 270 would repeal a section of the law abolishing the use of the electric chair and again make this the default method of execution in North Carolina, with inmates having the option to request one of the other two methods instead. The state banned the use of electrocution for capital punishment in 1998, and has executed no one since 2006, with the use of the death penalty postponed by lawsuits over the method of execution as well as racial bias in sentencing.
The proposal comes four years after South Carolina passed a similar bill reviving the use of the electric chair and firing squad, citing an inability for prisons to obtain the chemicals used for lethal injection. While that bill led to further legal challenges over whether these two methods of execution constituted cruel and unusual punishment, the South Carolina Supreme Court ultimately upheld their use in 2024, allowing executions to resume after a decade-plus pause.
'We know that there are court cases out there that are pending. Those court cases have been frozen in place for the last, you know, close to 20 years,' said Rep. David Willis (R-Union), a lead sponsor of the bill. 'It's time for these cases to be moved forward, either through resolution by action of this body or through the courts themselves.'
The move comes months after former Gov. Roy Cooper granted the most death sentence commutations in state history, converting 15 into life sentences. With the understanding that executions might resume in the near future, advocates pushed Cooper's administration heavily to commute all death sentences in the state.
It's unclear whether the additional execution methods would have an immediate impact on the unofficial moratorium. While the pause initially took effect because the state medical board barred doctors from participating in lethal injections, the Supreme Court struck down that prohibition in 2009. Since then, legal challenges have centered on objections under the Racial Justice Act, with death row inmates alleging racial bias in their convictions — a claim a Johnston County judge affirmed in February for Hasson Bacote, who received a commutation from Cooper.
In his pitch for the bill, Willis took aim at Cooper and other North Carolina leaders for enabling the pause on the death penalty. 'We've seen no support from our attorney general. We've seen no support from our previous two governors. And it's time for action on this,' he said.
In a statement prior to the vote, Noel Nickle, the executive director of the North Carolina Center for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, said the additional execution methods would only cause harm to the officials asked to carry them out.
'It forces our already overburdened state employees to carry out executions using violent methods we know will be extraordinarily damaging to their mental health,' she wrote.
Rep. Laura Budd (D-Mecklenburg) condemned lawmakers for advancing this bill at the same time the Senate was moving to end support for the state's Innocence Inquiry Commission in its budget proposal.
'My heart goes out to those families who have lost someone and are watching the appeals go on and on,' Budd said. 'But if we make a mistake and we take another person's life, then twice we have committed a wrong.'
The committee also approved a bill creating a 'lifetime' concealed carry program and permitting schools to store less-than-lethal weapons like tasers and pepper spray for self-defense.
House Bill 674, titled the 'Firearms Liberty Act,' creates lifetime permits to carry concealed firearms separate from the state's existing five-year permits, allowing them to remain in effect indefinitely unless revoked by the state or surrendered by the gun owner.
Rep. Jay Adams (R-Catawba) said the lifetime permit would have the same background check, educational, and training requirements as the state's current temporary permits, and holders would need to notify their local sheriff's department of any change of address. Unlike the temporary permits, the lifetime permits would not have 'reciprocity' with other states, meaning they would only be valid for use in North Carolina.
The bill also allows for individuals who are ordered to surrender their guns, such as after incidents of domestic violence, to transfer them to the custody of a licensed firearms dealer while the order remains in effect, rather than with the local sheriff's department. In what Adams described as a bipartisan element of the bill, gun owners may also enter into a 'safety hold' with a licensed firearms dealer, temporarily storing their guns under the shop's care such as if they are undergoing mental or emotional distress, or if they simply require more secure storage due to a period of absence.
Finally, the proposal would allow schools to keep 'defensive devices' in biometric safes for school employees who have completed annual trainings for their use. This does not include guns or other lethal weapons like knives, but allows for the secure storage of tasers, pepper spray, and other less-than-lethal defense implements on school property.
Budd, the Democrat from Mecklenburg County, raised concerns that law enforcement could mistake someone using one of these less-than-lethal weapons as a threat. She also warned that allowing items like tasers and pepper spray on school property could cause a 'slippery slope' toward the inclusion of more dangerous weapons in schools.
Susanne Duncan, a former schoolteacher with North Carolinians Against Gun Violence, said he finds the bill 'very alarming' during public comment, warning that having more armed individuals in a crisis could add to the danger to students and staff rather than ameliorating it.
'I was once caught in a riot in a school of 4,000 students. I was pinned against a wall,' Duncan said. 'I can tell you, if people had come running down that hall with tasers or with pepper spray or with guns, there would have been dozens of children and staff injured. It would have been a very dangerous situation.'
Two bills advanced by the committee targeted undocumented immigrants, including a bill increasing criminal penalties if they commit felonies and a requirement for various state agencies to vet immigration status in the course of their public work.
The first, House Bill 261, raises the level of a felony conviction for any defendant previously found guilty of a crime related to reentry after removal by immigration authorities. It also enhances sentences for committing felonies and misdemeanors while conspiring to promote or further criminal activity among all defendants.
Lead sponsor Rep. Neal Jackson (R-Moore) said his local district attorney had requested the bill. The goal, he said, was to send a message that people cannot 'come to North Carolina and commit serious crimes' or they will face greater consequences. 'The effect of this bill will be that a person who is here illegally in the country and commits a crime will be guilty of a felony that is one step higher than what they were initially convicted for,' he said.
Mark Swallow, an advocate with Democracy Out Loud, said he believes the bill is 'likely unconstitutional.' He argued that any requirement to increase felony status based on immigration status would violate the Equal Protection Clause, the Due Process Clause, and federal civil rights laws. He noted that sentence enhancements targeting noncitizens had previously been found unconstitutional in federal court.
Sammy Salkin, a policy analyst with the ACLU of North Carolina, denounced the proposal as a 'cruel attack on immigrant communities.'
'Penalizing individuals differently for the same offense based on their immigration status sets a dangerous precedent and raises significant equal protection concerns,' Salkin said. 'Punishment should reflect the nature of the crime, not the immigration status of the accused.'
Chuck Spahos, general counsel for the North Carolina Conference of District Attorneys, which backed the bill, said it was important to note the provision does not apply to all undocumented immigrants, only those with a prior conviction for a reentry offense. This, he said, means the law does not discern based on immigration status but instead on prior criminal record.
The second bill passed by the committee concerning immigration was House Bill 690, the 'Citizens Support Act.' That bill directs the state Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Commerce, housing agencies, state public universities, and the unemployment service to vet immigration status before providing benefits and social services to North Carolina residents.
Jackson, who also sponsored this bill, said the goal is to ensure that state benefits are 'provided only to U.S. citizens and noncitizens who are legally authorized to reside in the United States.' His co-sponsor, Rep. Jennifer Balkcom (R-Henderson), said the verification measures were necessary as 'accountability for tax holders' dollars.'
Rep. Ya Liu (D-Wake) suggested that in emergency situations, such verification processes could prove life-threatening.
'So, say if a patient is very ill and actively dying in front of a hospital, a state-funded hospital, so the doctors will have to check their immigration status to verify if they are a legal resident before they render any treatments?' she asked.
Balkcom said food, emergency services, and life-saving care are exempted for protection under federal law and so would not be affected by the new proposed verification requirements.
Salkin, the ACLU analyst, warned that the new restrictions could deter mixed-status families from seeking benefits for children who are U.S. citizens. 'This is likely to reduce benefit use among U.S. citizens and lawfully present immigrants. We urge you to vote no,' she said.
The sentence enhancement bill is scheduled before the House of Representatives for a floor vote Wednesday afternoon. The Citizens Support Act, Firearms Liberty Act, and death penalty bill all advance to the Committee on State and Local Government for further deliberation.