This statement can be attributed to Democracy North Carolina Executive Director Bob Hall:
Democracy North Carolina celebrates this victory that has been years in the making. Importantly, the evidence used to defeat the 2013 Monster Law came from an analysis of who previously used the provisions restricted by the law (such as same-day registration), as well who would likely be harmed by a new photo ID requirement. Based on that evidence, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals rightly concluded the Monster Law (H589) aimed to suppress the votes of African Americans “with almost surgical precision.”
Republican leaders in North Carolina are now saying they will not be deterred by the court’s decision because voters still need the “protection” from voter fraud that they claim the Monster Law provided.
However, we now have even stronger evidence that the Monster Law silenced the voices of tens of thousands of voters while it was in effect – and that it disproportionately harmed African-American and Latino voters. Any attempt to revive the Monster Law is not based on facts but would reflect a renewed campaign to rig the voting system for the personal and partisan gain of the political elites now in power.
For example, in the November 2014 general election – when out-of-precinct provisional voting (OOP) and same-day registration (SDR) were outlawed – 2,344 voters took the trouble to fill out the necessary paperwork, but their ballots were rejected because OOP and SDR were no longer in place; 38% were African Americans, although only about 22% of registered voters are black.
In the March 2016 primary election – the only election when the ID requirement was in effect – 1,419 voters without the required ID were silenced even after they filled out the “reasonable impediment” paperwork; 34% were African Americans. In that same election, when OOP and SDR were restored and back in effect, more than 29,000 voters had their ballots saved only because of those two provisions.
Provisions the Monster Law would have killed are protecting tens of thousands of voters – over 100,000 voters used SDR in the November 2016 election. To outlaw these provisions and add a restrictive photo ID requirement in the name of protecting voters is hypocrisy and nothing but manipulation of the political system for partisan and personal advantage.