Reno Reporter

The Supreme Court recently ruled in Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, deciding that state legislators had a right to intervene in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a voter ID measure passed by the North Carolina legislature. 

Tom Spencer, vice president of the Lawyer's Democracy Fund, praised the Supreme Court's decision saying the ruling would ensure that lawmakers of state legislatures across the nation would have a chance to defend their duly enacted laws over interference from potentially partisan attorneys general or secretaries of state.

According to SCOTUS Blog, on Thursday, June 23, the Supreme Court issued its opinion on the case known as Berger v. NC NAACP. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the opinion in an 8-1 decision, finding that North Carolina state legislators had a right to intervene in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a voter ID measure that they had passed into law. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the lone dissenter.

"Today is a great day for all litigants who seek to intervene in a lawsuit to defend a state law. This decision thwarts opportunities in the future for the state attorney general to work with plaintiffs to overturn laws the attorney general does not agree with for political reasons by not defending them," Spencer said in a statement. "Now the legislature can intervene and make sure their duly enacted laws are vigorously defended. This will have an acute effect in elections cases as partisan attorneys general and secretaries of state will have a harder time colluding with plaintiffs to sue and settle. This is not only a big win for the North Carolina legislature, this is a major win for democracy and fair elections!"

Reuters reported that Republican legislators had sought to intervene in the lawsuit because they did not have confidence in Josh Stein, North Carolina's Democrat attorney general, to defend the law.

Justice Gorsuch wrote that it was not proper to assume that North Carolina's attorney general had "adequately represented the state’s interests" and that the state lawmakers did indeed "bring a distinct state interest," according to SCOTUS Blog.

The voter ID measure was passed into law in 2018, over the veto of Democrat Gov. Roy Cooper, as reported by Reuters. It has been on hold pending the outcome of this Supreme Court decision after being blocked by state court judges in September of 2021.

According to Silver State Times, Nevada has not recently enacted any new legislation dealing with election integrity, despite some critics that have called for action. The Voter Reference Foundation, as highlighted by the Silver State Times, reported that Nevada's voter registration records were out of date, resulting in "thousands" of Nevadans voting with outdated addresses in 2020.

Gina Swoboda, executive director of Voter Reference Foundation, praised the Supreme Court’s ruling, saying that it "ensures that the government closest to the people, their legislative branch, is able to protect and defend the election integrity measures enacted by their states.”