NC Republicans attack a justice and democracy

You may not have heard of “Impartial Anita,” but state Senate Republicans would very much like you to know her.

Senate Republicans are pumping out press releases mockingly referring to “Impartial Anita,” also known as Anita Earls, a justice on the state Supreme Court. The releases attack Earls as being too compromised by her previous legal work and her support from a Democratic anti-gerrymandering group to pass judgment on election district maps drawn by the Republican-controlled legislature.

A three-judge lower court panel has upheld the maps as legally drawn, though its ruling noted that the maps provide a clear advantage to Republican candidates. The ruling has been appealed to the state Supreme Court, which will hear oral arguments in the case on Wednesday.

As a private attorney and head of the Durham-based Southern Coalition for Social Justice, Earls represented plaintiffs who successfully challenged Republican-backed election district maps as illegally gerrymandered. (Full disclosure: My daughter was an attorney with the Southern Coalition before leaving in 2013.)

In running for the state Supreme Court as a Democrat in 2018, Earls naturally drew campaign donations from a group led by former Obama-era Attorney General Eric Holder that seeks to end extreme gerrymandering, a goal supported by Americans of both parties. Holder’s group, the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, is backing a plaintiff challenging the maps.

That background is too much for state Senate Republicans. Sen. Amy Galey (R-Alamance) gasped in one press release that allowing Earls to rule on an area of the law about which she may be the court’s top student is a dire prospect. “Buying judgeships so partisan activists can use the power of the court to get desired political outcomes destroys the legitimacy of the judiciary,” Galey said.

The Republicans’ solution is to have Earls recuse herself. That would reduce the Democrats’ 4-3 court majority to a 3-3 split. If justices voted according to their party, a 3-3 tie would allow the lower court ruling to stand and the GOP gets a lopsided majority for the rest of the decade. Counting the votes will be a mere formality.

That Republican lawmakers want to unfairly skew elections isn’t a surprise. But their campaign to bully a justice before a verdict or even a hearing is unexpected and disgraceful.

The attacks on “Impartial Anita” aren’t coming from the Republican Party’s state headquarters. They are coming from the leadership of the legislature. One branch of government is trying to undermine public confidence in another branch.

That’s not just a political shot at a member of the court. It’s attacking something fundamental to democracy – the public’s faith in the legitimacy of the judiciary. And, along with the hysterics from Senate Republicans, have come rumblings that impeaching justices may be an option.

Thomas Metzloff, a Duke law professor who teaches legal ethics, said lawmakers are free to criticize court decisions and they can pass legislation in response to what they think a court got wrong. But preemptive attacks are out of bounds.

“To do anything in advance to signal some possible actions or concerns is a serious violation of the separation of powers in American democracy,” he said. “It’s critically important to let the judiciary do its job unimpeded by any threats.”

Galey said in one of the broadsides against Earls, “The perception of corruption on display here is stunning. Eric Holder paid six figures to get Justice Earls elected so she could hear his lawsuit. Is this really the future liberals want?”

Well, yes. It’s not corruption to want to stop legislative majorities from hijacking the election process. And it’s not corruption to raise funds and file lawsuits to stop it. What it is is using the checks and balances of the three branches to protect democracy. That’s an effort that all Americans, including “Impartial Anita,” should be partial toward.