Gov. McCrory looking to defend voter ID law without the Attorney General
Gov. McCrory stands by another discriminatory measure introduced by state GOP lawmakers as Attorney General, Roy Cooper, accepts the federal courts decision about overturning the voter ID law, which hurt people's ability to vote, register to vote, rather than limiting a right and civic duty for American citizens and the people of North Carolina.
North Carolina’s attorney general won’t represent the state in appealing last week’s court ruling that overturned a voter ID mandate and other voting restrictions.
Attorney General Roy Cooper said Tuesday the state had tried its best to defend against the lawsuit but lost. Outside counsel for the governor and legislative leaders who are already involved in the case can handle any appeals, Cooper said, although he pointed out that would cost additional money and confuse voters.
Cooper spoke to reporters earlier Tuesday and said there was a broader lesson for the Republican-controlled governor’s office and General Assembly.
“The courts keep striking down these laws passed by the legislature and signed by the governor,” Cooper said. “When are they going to learn that you just can’t run roughshod over the Constitution? That you have to pass laws that are within the framework of the state and federal constitutions? We need to start doing that in North Carolina.”
“I think this is what we’re going to have,” Cooper said following a meeting of the Council of State. “The Board of Elections needs to work on expanding the early voting hours, making sure that same-day registration is re-instituted, and obviously the voter ID portion would not be allowed any more.”
Cooper made it clear he agrees with the federal court’s reasoning.
“The bottom line is people will have more opportunities to register and vote, which was the origin of the laws that were passed in the first place — the ones that, it looks like now, were illegally overturned by the governor and the General Assembly.”
McCrory said the ruling would be appealed, and that the parties involved were deciding whether to go to the full 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals or directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.