Ability Of NC Legislators To Defend State’s Voter-ID Law From Lawsuits

First the Issues:

(1) Whether a State Agent authorized by State Law to defend the State’s Interest in Litigation must Overcome a Presumption of Adequate Representation to Intervene as of Right, in a Case in which a State Official is a Defendant.

(2) Whether a District Court’s determination of Adequate Representation, in Ruling on a Motion to Intervene, as of Right is Reviewed De-Novo (from the beginning), or for Abuse of Discretion.

(3) Whether Petitioners: Philip Berger (R-13th District), the President Pro Tempore of the State Senate, and Timothy Moore (R-111th District), the Speaker of the State House of Representatives, are entitled to Intervene as of Right in this Litigation.

Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, addresses the Ability of North Carolina Legislators to Defend the State’s Voter-ID Law from Lawsuits under the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act (VRA).

In their Petition, the Legislators argue, that Courts are Split as to whether an Official seeking to Intervene in a Case under a State Law must Prove that the State’s Interest is, Not Adequately Represented.

After Plaintiffs, Berger and Moore, challenged the Law and sought to Intervene in the Case as State Agents under a State Law, the en banc, with All Judges or a Quorum of Judges Present, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit eventually Affirmed the District Court’s Denial of the legislators’ attempt on the Ground that the State Attorney General was adequately Defending the Law.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker