Latest news with #BrandonKingdollar
Yahoo
25-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
In the face of election denial in North Carolina, the judiciary upholds democracy
State Supreme Court Justice takes the oath of office in the old North Carolina House chamber on May 13, 2025. (Photo: Brandon Kingdollar/NC Newsline) It took six months, but the race for the North Carolina Supreme Court is finally over. The rules of the game held – just as they did following the 2020 election – and the winner is now in office. That's a win for democracy. And we owe that win in large part to an exceptionally strong ruling from Trump-appointed judge Richard E. Myers II, chief judge of the Eastern District of North Carolina. While other branches might be absent (Congress), or ambivalent on whether or not it has to follow the Constitution (Executive), the federal judiciary continues to hold the line. North Carolina is one of seven states that has partisan elections for its judges. In the November 2024 election for one of North Carolina's Supreme Court seats, Democrat Allison Riggs defeated Republican Jefferson Griffin by 734 votes. Out of 5,540,090 votes. Griffin challenged the results in court, as is his right. Included in Griffin's challenges were attempts to retroactively challenge the state's election laws, and then use the new understanding of the law to throw out 60,000 presumptively-valid votes. All based in election denial conspiracies. Such an effort violates two important principles of how our elections are run: 1) You can't change the rules of the game after the game, and 2) You can't punish voters for following the rules as they were understood at the time. These principles are what kept Al Gore from invalidating 25,000 likely-Republican votes in Florida in the 2000 presidential election, and they're what allow for finality in election results. The North Carolina Court of Appeals and the North Carolina Supreme Court shocked the election community by partially indulging Griffin's after-the-fact challenges. They showed they were willing to set a dangerous precedent of legitimizing false claims of voter fraud, especially in close margin races. If the North Carolina Supreme Court's decision had held, and if it had gained popularity in other state courts, then we would have been in a world of trouble for 2026. Elections would drag on for months. For example, if I, in Arizona, narrowly lost an election, but then challenged the legality of mail balloting, then that legal theory would have to be fully litigated before calling an end to the election. Despite the fact that I could have challenged the legality of mail voting before the election. Imagine if the election in dispute had been a seat in Congress. Or if the partisan balance of Congress had only been divided by one vote. Would we have been waiting until May to seat the Speaker of the House? Maybe then it would've gotten more attention nationally. It flew largely under the radar for many Americans. And who can blame them? Democracy is under attack from so many angles, who can keep up? The truth is, election denial was alive and well in North Carolina this election cycle. But ultimately, the federal courts stepped in and settled the race once and for all. Judge Myers didn't hesitate to rebuke the problematic nature of such an approach. He wrote: 'A post-election change of practice that results in the discarding of votes is abominable under the Constitution of the United States.' Griffin ultimately called off the fight and conceded to Riggs, allowing her to, finally, be sworn in to a new term on the North Carolina Supreme Court. As long as I wasn't one of the candidates, nor a North Carolina citizen looking for finality, there's a silver lining. The ruling provided a persuasive refresher on election law for judges. It came from the chief judge of a district. It came from a Republican-appointed judge. It came from a Trump-appointed judge. Don't get me wrong. The lawsuit threatened to undermine the legitimacy of our election system and silence the eligible voters. It's going to take time for pro-democracy officials in North Carolina, and across our country, to rebuild trust in our election system. We have the federal courts to thank for keeping our election system free, fair, and secure this cycle. I firmly believe that almost all federal judges consistently do the right thing according to fact and law, regardless of their politics. But for those who think the judiciary is just 'politics in robes,' we couldn't have asked for a better ambassador for election-law-sanity than we got in this federal court. As I have said many times over the past few months, thank goodness for our federal judiciary, one which continues to be the envy of the world.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Civil rights groups protest North Carolina bills targeting undocumented immigrants
Maria Fernanda Najera-Aguilar, an organizer with El Pueblo, said she prays for the safety of her family and friends each day amid a crackdown by immigration authorities. (Photo: Brandon Kingdollar / NC Newsline) Immigrant rights advocates called on a crowd of about 100 to stand up against bills targeting undocumented immigrants in the state as part of an Immigrant Rights Advocacy Day demonstration outside the North Carolina General Assembly Wednesday. Speakers from the ACLU of North Carolina, the Education Justice Alliance, the Carolina Migrant Network, Muslim Women For, and El Pueblo rallied on the lawn of the Legislative Building and denounced a set of four bills as part of a broader anti-immigrant agenda by lawmakers. After the demonstration, they split up into groups to talk to legislators and leave informational materials with their offices and marched to the Governor's Mansion to deliver a petition demanding the veto of the bills. The four bills seek to crack down on undocumented immigrants in a variety of ways: House Bill 318 requires sheriffs cooperate with ICE; Senate Bill 153 does the same for state law enforcement; House Bill 261 increases the felony level of criminal charges against defendants with past immigration-related offenses; and House Bill 690 requires state agencies and universities to vet the immigration status of benefit recipients. Fernando Martinez, an organizing director with the Education Justice Alliance, urged lawmakers to 'stop playing politics with our families.' He denounced North Carolina politicians for 'painting us as criminals' who are 'invading this country' and stressed that immigrants are neighbors, colleagues, and classmates who make up a fundamental part of the community. 'We go to prayer houses together. We serve and produce food. We are teachers, we are nurses, we are building this state — literally,' Martinez said. 'Immigrants belong here, [we] are North Carolinians — and stop pushing us out.' America Juarez, a coordinator for the Carolina Migrant Network, said families in Charlotte are living in fear of ICE, alleging that agents in unmarked vehicles have been detaining employees at their places of work and children at school in an expansive operation that began May 12. She said her organization has received more than 133 calls for help in just over a week, and warned that provisions in the bills expanding cooperation with ICE would only worsen this crackdown. 'When federal agents in unmarked vehicles and civilian abduct members in our community, our neighbors, our coworkers, our families, it does not make North Carolina safer, it makes us all less safe,' Juarez said. 'For our elected officials, your silence is complicit. Will you stand by as children in your district lose their parents?' Nora Khalifa, an organizer with Muslim Women For, said such 'intimidation tactics' have had a tangible impact on her community. She said she's noticed people who no longer come to worship services out of fear that they might be detained by ICE and has heard from people who avoid public spaces as much as possible for the same reason. Closing the demonstration, Maria Fernanda Najera-Aguilar of El Pueblo said she prays for the safety of her family and friends every day amid the ongoing mass detention of immigrants, and in particular, last year's House Bill 10, which required sheriffs to follow ICE detention orders. She urged lawmakers to take a stand for 'basic human rights.' 'How can we pursue happiness and achieve aspirations when peace and security are constantly under threat?' she asked. 'I stand here today not just to speak, but to remind you that we are watching, we are organizing, and we are not going anywhere.'
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Amazon labor organizers challenge union election loss, alleging employer coercion
As organizers seeking to unionize Amazon rally on Saturday, Feb. 8, 2025, a shipping truck rolls out of the dock. (Photo: Brandon Kingdollar/NC Newsline) After losing their bid to unionize the Amazon warehouse in Garner by a three-to-one margin in February, labor organizers with Carolina Amazonians United for Solidarity and Empowerment are challenging the election results, arguing Amazon coerced employees into voting against the union campaign. In a filing with the National Labor Relations Board on Feb. 24, CAUSE alleges that Amazon misled workers into believing that they would lose existing benefits and wages if they voted in favor of the union, brought in a speaker who said the union would deport workers, and targeted pro-union workers for discipline throughout the election period. 'The Employer engaged in improper surveillance of employees, created the impression of surveillance, and interrogated employees regarding their Union support and Union activity,' the CAUSE objection reads. 'The Employer selectively enforced workplace rules regarding performance standards and appearance, targeting known Union supporters for discipline and enforcement while ignoring similar violations by workers who were not known Union supporters.' Though more than 30% of workers comprising the bargaining unit signed union cards in 2024 — representing the support of more than 1,000 warehouse associates — fewer ultimately voted in favor of the union, with just 829 voting in favor and 2,447 voting against, according to the NLRB. That left the union campaign far short of the majority vote necessary to win the right to bargain on behalf of the warehouse staff. Eileen Hards, a spokesperson for Amazon, declined to comment on CAUSE's allegations of coercion, surveillance, and selective discipline, but expressed satisfaction with the result of the election. 'Our team in Garner overwhelmingly chose to keep a direct relationship with Amazon,' Hards wrote in an emailed statement. 'We look forward to continuing to make RDU1 a great place to work together, and to supporting our teammates as they build their futures with us.' In March, the NLRB placed the union campaign's challenge on hold while complaints around the company's conduct during the election period are vetted. Meanwhile, labor activists are gearing up for renewed efforts at Garner's RDU1 warehouse as well as additional facilities throughout the Carolinas. Since 2022, CAUSE has brought more than a dozen unfair labor practice complaints against Amazon, largely focusing on employee terminations, discipline of union organizers, and a general climate of surveillance. The first of these complaints, coming in June 2022, soon after the union campaign's formation, cited warehouse rules forbidding discussion of wages, hours, and other working conditions as an illegal prohibition on union activity. It also pointed to the end of site-specific COVID-19 updates, restrictions on the company's internal discussion board, and the removal of a 'web clock punch' feature on the employee app as impediments to protected labor activities. The most extensive labor litigation pursued by the union surrounded disciplinary action against its co-founder, Rev. Ryan Brown, who alleged in 2022 that his complaints about warehouse conditions and racial discrimination were met with retaliation from supervisors, including a 'final written warning.' In a May 2024 response to the complaint, Amazon conceded that it issued the warning but denied that 'such discipline was issued for any unlawful purpose' and was instead purely due to violation of company policy. Arguing that the complaint should be dismissed, attorneys for Amazon went further than the facts of the individual case: they claimed the NLRB's adjudicative procedures themselves are inherently unconstitutional, as board administrators are 'improperly insulated from the President's removal power.' 'The Complaint should be dismissed because the agency procedures through which the Complaint will be resolved violate Article II of the United States Constitution,' attorneys for Amazon wrote. 'The National Labor Relations Board's concurrent exercise of legislative, executive, and judicial power in this proceeding violates the separation of powers established by the United States Constitution and the guarantee of due process found in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.' Though Amazon was ordered in September 2024 — nearly two years after the initial complaint — to produce documents relating to policy complaints and allegations of discrimination that Brown and other employees voiced, the union withdrew its complaint the following month, due to the time and expense of the lengthy appeals process. CAUSE has alleged that several employees have lost their jobs as a result of union organizing leading up to and during the election period, including Brown and Duke professor Orin Starn. Those terminations have continued in the wake of the election, organizers say, including that of Diedre King in March. According to CAUSE, she worked at the Garner warehouse for four years with an unblemished disciplinary record and was an 'active, dedicated, and visible' member of the union organizing committee before she was accused of slapping a coworker during the election period, a claim she denies. King said in the wake of her termination, she has received 'amazing' support from other members of CAUSE. Organizers set up a fundraiser that has raised more than $5,500 for her as of Friday, and she said she also received a flood of calls offering support, even from colleagues she did not know before. 'They call, they check up on me and see what I'm doing, get me out, get me involved in stuff — and not want me to sit at home and, like, be really depressed.' Starn, the Duke professor, pointed to King's termination and that of another employee afterwards as evidence of a 'mass purge' targeting union organizers. A worker on the warehouse's loading dock and an active organizer with the union, Starn was let go in December 2023 after a social media post in which he toasted the union effort with a sip of rum in the parking lot after work. While the company cited its drug and alcohol policy as grounds for the dismissal, Starn wrote in an October 2024 NLRB appeal letter that he was instead let go for the 'real and illegal reason' of openly campaigning for the union, one of just three workers doing so at the time. 'My firing damaged our effort by keeping me out of the facility and the chance to mobilize workers there, although we are making strong progress in our card collection nonetheless,' he wrote. 'We desperately need the protection of the NLRB in supporting rightful complaints like mine to keep a powerful company from getting away with demoralizing illegal tactics in trying to suppress worker efforts to have a voice in the workplace.' Hards, the Amazon spokesperson, wrote in a statement that Starn's termination was not related to his union activities and disputed his characterization of selective enforcement of the company's drug and alcohol policy. 'The decision to terminate Mr. Starn was unrelated to whether he supported any particular cause or group. Mr. Starn was terminated for violating Amazon's drug and alcohol policy, a violation that has resulted in several other terminations at RDU1 in the past,' she wrote. 'We expect all of our employees to follow our policies, and we take appropriate action when those policies are violated.' Ultimately, of the 13 labor complaints brought by CAUSE organizers, all but two have been dismissed or withdrawn. But the most recent of those complaints, an expansive Feb. 7 complaint alleging a campaign of surveillance, intimidation, and retaliation by Amazon throughout the election period, remains open, as does a Jan. 15 complaint citing the arrest of CAUSE supporters on warehouse property in December. A Feb. 12 complaint that Amazon brought against the union over the removal of company posters is also still active. A resolution to CAUSE's election objections will come only after their prior complaints are adjudicated. 'I have determined to postpone the objections hearing until I determine the merits of the related pending unfair labor practice allegations and whether consolidation of the pending objections with an unfair labor practice proceeding before an administrative law judge is warranted,' NLRB regional director Michael Turner wrote in March. With President Donald Trump's election, however, it appears CAUSE's claims may well face an uphill battle with the NLRB. In March, Trump nominated Crystal Carey as the board's next general counsel — a management-side labor lawyer whose firm has represented Amazon in labor disputes and advanced the claim that the board itself is unconstitutional. At the center of the ongoing dispute over the labor election results is the conduct of Amazon and the union campaign during the election period, from late 2024 to early 2025. Organizers say Amazon carried out a campaign of intimidation and union-busting, culminating in the arrest of CAUSE supporters on warehouse property, while the company says the campaign went too far in its efforts to reach workers on the premises and counter company messaging, accusing them of trespassing and vandalism. In their Feb. 24 election challenge, lawyers for CAUSE wrote that the thrust of Amazon's messaging campaign was that unionizing would be 'futile' and was likely to lead to the rollback of higher wages, benefits like volunteer and unpaid time off, and other employment protections that the company had granted in the absence of organized representation. '[Amazon] threatened employees with the loss of benefits and/or pay if workers voted in favor of being represented by the Union,' the attorneys wrote. '[They] solicited employees to participate in the production of anti-Union marketing materials, and took video footage of employees to use in anti-Union videos without the employees' knowledge or consent.' Italo Medelius, a CAUSE organizer who worked the warehouse's shipping dock, said managers and employee relations consultants would walk the warehouse floor, soliciting workers and discouraging them from joining the union. This was paired with a 'Vote No' promotional video that aired on repeat on televisions across the facility's lobbies and break rooms, which he said featured a former Teamster making the case that union representation would only harm the workers. 'So just a total fear campaign, 24/7 inside of that warehouse,' he said. According to a report by LaborLab, a pro-union nonprofit corporate watchdog, Amazon paid management-side consulting firm Road Warrior Productions more than $366,000 over the span of roughly a month to create anti-union materials used in the election, which the organization condemned as 'union-busting services.' 'Amazon is one of the greatest union busters in the history of the world,' said Medelius. 'They cover every single inch of that warehouse in some way, shape, or form with anti-union propaganda.' Hards, the Amazon spokesperson, cited the extensive organizing efforts across Amazon facilities throughout the U.S. as necessitating the use of labor consulting firms. She pointed to 'tens of billions of dollars in benefits' including health care, a 401K program with a company match, and pre-paid college tuition as evidence that investments in workers vastly outweigh the use of those services. 'We also know that there are outside organizations working hard and spending heavily to spread inaccurate information about us to our teams. Which is also why we work to ensure our employees are fully informed about their rights and how decisions about outside representation could impact their day-to-day lives working at Amazon,' Hards wrote in a statement. Medelius also described an anti-union persuasion campaign that he said targeted Spanish-speaking workers specifically, which he said invoked racial stereotypes in an attempt to divide workers. Medelius, who is bilingual, said he was individually banned from Amazon's Spanish-language informational meetings after speaking out against these tactics. He added that on one occasion, he was required to report for a random drug test minutes after speaking out at one of these meetings, an experience he said other organizers reported as well. 'The crazy thing is that we've been fighting for translation in Human Resources. So, if somebody that's a Spanish speaker has an issue that needs to be resolved by HR, I have to go with them to translate for them,' Medelius said. 'But when it comes to union busting, everything is in Spanish, so it's kind of a little bit dystopian there.' Starn recounted a town hall meeting in which a manager sought to associate CAUSE with immigrant deportation efforts to 'raise fear and uncertainty' among workers and scare them out of supporting the union effort. 'At one of the town hall meetings, one of the mangers says, you know, 'We've been hearing that CAUSE is telling people that if they vote no, they'll be deported, and we don't think anybody should be deported,'' Starn said. 'This is a completely outlandish charge, but it's the kind of thing Amazon does.' This incident was also detailed in the election challenge, with attorneys for the union campaign writing that Amazon 'coerced and intimidated employees into voting against Union representation by falsely accusing the Union of suggesting workers could be deported for voting no' and themselves 'suggesting that workers' immigration status could be impacted by the results of the election.' According to Hards, employees came forward with complaints that union organizers told them if they did not vote in favor of the union, they could face deportation, and the comments during the informational session were intended to rebut those claims. The complaint also alleges that Amazon took action against specific employees to prevent them from voting in favor of the union, including delaying a known union supporter's return-to-work date until after the election had concluded. And it details a culture of surveillance in which workers' social media accounts were allegedly monitored for statements about the campaign and where workers were 'interrogated' about support for the union. Many of these allegations were also the subject of a Feb. 7 unfair labor practice complaint filed by CAUSE that remains open, including a claim that workers were explicitly asked to report union activity to management and that Amazon selectively targeted known union supporters for disciplinary action. These claims have been a persistent subject of CAUSE's labor complaints long before the union card campaign concluded, with their attorneys writing in a May 2023 unfair labor practice complaint that Amazon was 'instructing its employees to file internal complaints against supporters of [CAUSE]' and launching investigations against organizers to search for cause to terminate them. The union alleges that interference with the election effort came to a head on Dec. 7, 2024, when three organizers not employed by Amazon were arrested by Garner Police on trespassing charges as they sought to pass out food and collect union cards outside the warehouse. Days later, Amazon also terminated Brown, the union co-founder, citing inflammatory remarks likening company management to slaveholders and labeling a defender of the company an 'Uncle Tom.' Hards declined to comment on the broader allegations of coercion and surveillance, but wrote that the company was within its rights to seek the removal of non-employees from its property during the Dec. 7 incident. 'Last December, several individuals who aren't Amazon employees or partners came on to our property and refused multiple requests to leave,' Hards wrote. 'After repeated attempts to remedy the situation and consistent with our standard protocols, we engaged law enforcement for assistance. Those individuals were eventually arrested after refusing to follow the police officer's orders.' She also condemned Brown for what she described as efforts to 'push misinformation to the media' on his arrest and said his dismissal was the result of 'repeated misconduct' including the use of 'derogatory and racist language,' which the company had previously investigated. 'His most recent violation resulted in his termination because we don't tolerate that type of inappropriate behavior at Amazon.' During this same period, Amazon alleges that union supporters tore down posters encouraging workers to vote no, labeling the actions as 'acts of property damage.' CAUSE contends in its own complaint that scores of pro-union posters and signage from inside and outside the facility were destroyed — including signs posted in the break room and banners supporting the union hanging on the public sidewalk outside the warehouse. Despite these setbacks, the card campaign succeeded in January after organizers collected signatures from more than 30% of workers comprising the prospective bargaining unit. But in February, they lost by a roughly three-to-one margin, a result that indicated there had been a falloff of support in the critical month leading up to the election — a result that Medelius said came as 'a blow' in the moment. 'Ultimately, just looking at it, we knew that historically and logically we were facing an uphill battle from the very beginning,' Medelius said. 'Everybody that's a professional labor organizer has told us, you're never gonna win the first time.' On Friday, organizers with CAUSE once again set up their tents outside RDU1 — their first demonstration on-site since the election. As they renewed their pitch to workers, the company began work on a new eight-foot fence along the property line. 'My biggest fear leading up to the election was if there is a loss, or if there is a big loss with a big margin like what happened, that we would just collapse — that's what Amazon pretty much hopes, right?' Medelius said. 'But with us, I mean, the next day we had a meeting, that Sunday, and it was one of our most attended meetings. There were even people that voted no that were there and trying to figure out how we can build a better union.' He described a mood of 'optimism and hope' among organizers as the fight moves forward and called the 829 supporters in the warehouse a strong foothold to come back and succeed in the next effort. According to NLRB rules, a union campaign can file for a new election 12 months after the conclusion of the previous one. That means organizers could give Amazon 'another Christmas present this year' with a renewed card authorization campaign, Medelius said. King said she has heard from workers who voted no and who have had a change of heart since, pointing to issues like a wave of terminations after the election and excessive enforcement of policies like cell phone restrictions and 'time off task' discipline. 'That's why we're out here today, to let people know that we're still here,' she said on Friday, sitting under one of the tents to meet and persuade former coworkers. 'We're not going anywhere, and we have your back, but we need y'all to have ours as well.' After the first election effort, Medelius said, organizers now have firsthand experience with the company's anti-union tactics, giving them a better chance at countering their messaging among workers. 'Now we know the rules, we know what we've got to do, and we can come in with a better strategy,' Medelius said. 'It's kind of like a boxing match, right? You lose one round, but then you jump back and win the next three, so we're very excited to do that.' In particular, he outlined plans to strengthen CAUSE's Hispanic Organizing Committee and day shift and night shift organizing committees, and to begin collecting authorization cards year-round. He added that organizers had been in contact with workers at the RDU5 and DRT8 warehouses in Durham as well as facilities in South Carolina who want to begin their own efforts, but declined to offer specific information about potential future campaigns, citing the need for secrecy around organizing strategies. Benny Koval, chair of CAUSE's night shift organizing committee, said the immediate priority was 'what we can do on the shop floor,' pushing back on issues like excessive temperatures in the facility, post-holiday rush layoffs, and mandatory overtime days — one of which was slated to be on Mother's Day before the company backtracked after employee outcries, Koval said. 'I feel like they're just stepping on us to see how much we'll take to a certain extent,' Koval said. Meanwhile, efforts to unionize Amazon continue throughout the U.S., particularly across the South. In Louisville, Kentucky, workers at the company's KCVG Air Hub are seeking to organize through the Teamsters, and in Bessemer, Alabama, labor officials have ordered Amazon to hold a third union election after finding unlawful interference in previous attempts. Abraham Walker, a sociology professor at Fayetteville State University, said the South poses some structural obstacles for union campaigns. Every state in the region is a 'right-to-work' state, meaning that workplaces cannot make union membership compulsory and all workers are entitled to the same benefits regardless of union affiliation, creating what Walker called a 'free rider problem' in which workers reap the rewards of union-bargained contracts without paying dues to support organizing efforts. And because of the low rates of union membership throughout the South, many workers do not know anyone who is a member of a union, leaving them susceptible to misinformation about union impacts, Walker said. He noted that in Chattanooga, Tennessee, it took three elections before workers at the city's Volkswagen plant voted to unionize the facility in 2024. Walker said a benefit of CAUSE's status as an independent grassroots campaign is that 'they're not going anywhere.' He cited 'very strong coalitions' the organizers built across the Research Triangle as a source of structural support that will allow the union to renew its efforts going forward. 'Despite the final tally, I see a lot of promise in CAUSE's future,' Walker said. 'There's going to be a process of reassessment, I think, going forward. They will in all likelihood try to do this again — it might not be a year, it might be a few years from now, but one of the things about Amazon warehouses, which is both challenging and potentially an advantage, is the turnover's high.' The New York Times reported in 2021 that Amazon sees a roughly 150% turnover rate among its hourly associates each year. Medelius said this was a source of difficulty in this year's election because many of those who signed authorization cards were already gone from the warehouse by February. But that fact can also be turned to the union campaign's advantage, he said: many, if not most, of the 2,447 who voted against the union will no longer be with at RDU1 in a year's time, giving organizers 'a brand-new warehouse' for its next effort. 'All we've gotta do is keep our supporters, make sure that we keep telling them our motto, 'Don't quit, organize,' and that's the way that we're going to out-organize them, so the plan right now is keep calling for an election — if we lose, do it again,' Medelius said. 'We're going to organize as if we had won the election, we're going to continue building our movement, and we're gonna continue not just within RDU1, but all across the Carolinas,' he added. 'This election hasn't stopped the train.'
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NC House committee approves bills on death penalty, concealed carry, and immigration
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.
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill to allow expedited removal of occupants from residential property moves to NC House floor
The North Carolina Legislative Building as it appeared on March 14, 2025. (Photo: Brandon Kingdollar/NC Newsline) The North Carolina House Rules Committee advanced a bill Tuesday that would permit the expedited removal of unauthorized persons from residences, though some lawmakers voiced concerns over issues of due process. Under House Bill 96, which was approved by the Judiciary 1 Committee last week, property owners and their representatives would be allowed to request law enforcement officers to remove individuals who are unlawfully inhabiting a residence they own and refuse to leave. A tenant who is holding over after a lease term has expired would not be subject to the bill as it does not apply to properties that were offered 'as an accommodation for the general public,' nor to circumstances in which payment for continued residence was demanded or paid or a contract permitting residence was agreed upon. Upon the property owner's request, a county magistrate would be empowered to authorize the expedited removal of the occupant and require law enforcement to evict them from the property within 24 hours as well as potentially arrest them if they have violated trespassing or other laws. The bill also provides for law enforcement to 'stand by to keep the peace' while the property owner changes locks and removes the occupant's personal belongings, shielding officers from liability for complying with the law in good faith. The bill would also protect property owners and their representatives from liability if the occupant's personal belongings are destroyed or damaged during the removal process unless the removal is found to be wrongful. In cases of wrongful removal, occupants can bring civil action to recover the property, costs and damages incurred, and a civil fine and attorneys' fees. And if the occupant and the owner are engaged in litigation prior to removal, expedited removal is prohibited. Rep. Steve Tyson (R-Craven), who is a realtor and general contractor, said the bill is designed to target people who unlawfully inhabit homes and apartments where there was never a valid lease. Tyson said the bill was motivated by concern that such removals can be held up in court and appeals 'practically forever,' and he felt it necessary to make the process 'fair for the property owner.' 'Anybody can get a lease online now and print it out,' Tyson said. 'You can go somewhere online, find a copy of the deed to the property if you're savvy and see how the owner of the property signs their name. And so, it puts law enforcement in a very precarious position.' But Rep. Sarah Stevens (R-Surry), who is an attorney, said she has 'genuine concerns' over the lack of due process for occupants under the expedited removal bill, adding that she plans to vote against the bill on the floor. 'There's a tremendous amount of violation of due process in this procedure,' Stevens said. 'A magistrate has no authority to take evidence to determine if there's any fairness or hear from the other side at all.' She said even with the liability waiver at the state level, the bill puts law enforcement at risk for litigation over potential due process violations at the federal level. Tyson said the penalties for filing for expedited removal under false premises act as a sufficient deterrent to property owners, even without an initial opportunity for the occupant to present their case. 'If an unscrupulous landlord — and there are a few of those out there as we know — goes in and swears this affidavit on this expedited removal and he perjures himself, it's punishable as a class F felony,' Tyson said. 'That's up to five years in prison.' Rep. Carla Cunningham (D-Mecklenburg), who put forth a similar proposal in the previous session, said 'we need to do something' because property owners are losing out on tens of thousands of dollars because they are unable to remove people unlawfully living in residences they own. 'You get nothing and you are the one responsible for the property taxes on the property,' Cunningham said. 'I don't know if this is the right way to do it, Representative Stevens, but we've got to do something because people are losing money.' While in favor of the bill creating an 'express lane' for removal, Rep. Reece Pyrtle (R-Rockingham), a former police chief, raised concerns over the onus placed on law enforcement to supervise the removal of occupants' personal belongings. He advised turning to a separate civil process for that aspect of the law. 'Being a law enforcement officer, being on the scene, I don't want to get into a he said-she said over a piece of property.' The bill was one of 20 that received the Rules Committee's approval Tuesday afternoon. All bills in the House of Representatives must first win approval from the gatekeeper panel before proceeding to the full House for a vote.
