Even a person of minimal intelligence would not want to change the body overseeing an election while the election was going on.
Wait, am I of minimal intelligence?
If you would want to change the body overseeing an election during a election while the election was going on, you are of minimal intelligence.
You might not recall this but during the earlier litigation when there was no board of elections, the Green Party could not be certified as a qualified party. The staff could do all the of the paper work, but only the board could take official action. The Green Party was concerned that they could not make nominations.
I was just musing that maybe if a board is not deemed constitutional, how is their ability to certify an election legitimate? Does that not seem problematic? I'm not even talking about whether it's OK in our system, I don't care because that's not the point of my post. I'm just saying, does that kind of situation inspire confidence?
The issue was how the board was constituted not its function.
The board does not have the authority to declare that Dan McCready is beholden to the deep pocket money interests of Nancy Pelosi and had never voted in any primary before 2017 and therefore Jeff Scott is elected. It can simply add up the votes certified by the county boards and decide who was elected.
The constitutional concerns were:
(1) The governor could not appoint a majority of the board;
(2) The governor could not at least indirectly control the executive director. I think the Democrats don't like the current director because she was chosen by the Republican majority. It would have been much worse to have replaced her during the election. Remember that she was the one who ordered the letters to be sent out to absentee applicants in Bladen County.
(3) Since the governor doesn't control a majority of appointees he can't control the chairmanship.
(4) The governor can't control the chairmanship of the county boards. It is not clear whether the current 2/2 split is valid or not.
The effect of the court's action was to void the law and revert back to the 2016 law. Under that law the Republicans nominate five members, and the Democrats five members (the "bipartisan" is then removed from the name"). The governor chooses five members, not more than three of one party. It is unclear what happens if a party does not submit nominees.
The governor has said he would appoint the members regardless whether the parties nominate anyone.
At any rate, like I said, I think the best situation if the current board cannot exist is for Cooper to try to fill the new, constitutional board with as many as the same members. But afaik the new board can't even meet yet.
The plaintiffs (Governor Cooper) and defendants (legislative leaders) both sought the continuation of the bipartisan board through completion of the election (certification of results).
The chair of the NCSBE, which is not a part to the litigation, sent a letter to the court. The Wake County court declined to pass it on to the court since it was by a non-party to the litigation. The legislative defendants said they no problem with the letter being passed on to the court. No word from the governor, so the court lifted the stay and said goodbye.
Cooper is a partisan hack, who didn't like the fact that he had to deal with a Republican legislature, and a Republican-majority Council of State. It was only a couple of weeks ago that the Supreme Court ruled that the legislature could require confirmation of executive officials. Cooper had filled that suit before he was even governor.
Remember when Cooper tried to call a special session of the legislature. The Constitution requires that the governor consult with the Council of State. North Carolina is kind of odd in that 10 independently elected state officers who are independent (not under the governor's direction). It would be like if the US cabinet secretaries were directly elected. In 2016, Republicans won 6 of the 10 positions. Cooper's "consultation" consisted of emails sent by Cooper's press secretary, directing the other members of the Council of State to confirm that they had received the email.
Hey Virginia please confirm that you received this email
Be sure to wire the $1,000,000 to my secret Swiss bank account.
In that case, I don't think it even went to the courts. The legislature just laughed at Cooper ("Cooper is just being Cooper").
It is pretty reasonable to have the State Board of Elections to not be under single party control - assuming that one wants fair elections.
The legislature provided for a 4:4 split with appointments made by the legislature.
The district court ruled that they did not have jurisdiction because it was a political issue.
Cooper appealed to the Supreme Court, which requested more information about why it was a political issue, and if it were judiciable how would the district court rule on the constitutionality.
The district court explained why they thought that the courts did not have jurisdiction, but if they did, that the law was constitutional.
The Supreme Court reversed on a 4-3 party-line decision.
The legislature reworked their proposal, and provided that the two parties would each nominate six persons, with the governor appointing four of them. The eight members would then nominate two non-affiliated voters for the ninth member, and the governor would appoint one. The governor could remove a member at his discretion (the original provided for removal only for cause).
Governor Cooper let that bill become law without his signature (he chose not to veto it). He then sued, and also challenged some other provisions that he had not a year later.
This is the law that the board was operating under, and was declared unconstitutional three weeks before the election while early voting was underway.
You might know that this started when the Democrats began vote harvesting nursing homes.
Before then, it was mostly Republicans who absentee voted, because it required a personal note from the vote.
"Dear Ms. Virginia, Just thought I'd drop a line saying that the Azaleas are quite beautiful this time of year. That means it is time for the primary. Would you send me an absentee ballot?"
But then the legislature required a specific form, which made it easier for political parties to go complete the absentee request forms. The Democrats in Bladen County have forms that are pre-printed with all the voter information. All the voter has to do his signature and identifying information. Runners collect these and the ballots are mailed out. A day or two later the runners return to help with the ballot:
(1) Making "suggestions" who to vote for.
(2) Witness that the voter marked his own ballot, but maintaining ballot secrecy.
(3) Providing assistance.
A lot of young voters were said to not know how to vote.
Does this mean they didn't know how to fill in the bubbles, or didn't know how to vote a Democrat straight ticket?
