-
The 4-3 ruling marks the first time in state history, according to legal authorities, that a criminal conviction was invalidated because of a prosecutor's unlawful exclusion of a Black juror through a process developed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1986.
-
Associate Justices Anita Earls, Sam Ervin IV and Phil Berger Jr. denied on Monday the recusal motions targeting them from lawyers covering both sides of the litigation. Their decisions likely mean all seven justices will listen to remote oral arguments Wednesday in the challenges to the state’s recently enacted congressional and legislative districts.
-
Oral arguments in this redistricting case are set for this Wednesday.
-
The court said Monday it'll take up lawsuits claiming Harvard, a private institution, and the University of North Carolina, a state school, discriminate against Asian American applicants. A decision against the schools could mean the end of affirmative action in admissions.
-
The judges began hearing evidence Monday, and the state Supreme Court has told them to rule by early next week, with expected appeals to follow.
-
Wednesday's testimony by House Redistricting Committee Chairman Destin Hall contrasts with comments about transparency Republicans made while drawing congressional and legislative boundaries this fall.
-
Three state trial judges started hearing evidence Monday offered by lawyers for plaintiffs in lawsuits that allege district boundaries approved by the Republican-controlled legislature in November are tainted by extreme partisanship and racial bias that favor the GOP.
-
A three-judge panel began a hearing Friday on two lawsuits. Plaintiffs want the judges to prevent state officials from administering elections with the maps because they say they’re extreme partisan gerrymanders.
-
State law requires justices to retire at 72. Hudson turns 70 in February. Her decision was announced days before candidate filing begins. Two of the court’s seven seats will be up for election in 2022.
-
The ruling could be appealed. Lee has said he believed he had the authority from the state constitution and the Supreme Court to act. This is the latest chapter in longstanding school funding litigation known as "Leandro."