WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. (CN) - A federal panel should issue an injunction preventing a new 2025 congressional map from being used in the 2026 midterms, North Carolina voters argued, because the new map dismantles a Black opportunity district.
The legislature's "unnecessary and unjustified consideration of race and partisanship" in the redistricting process violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments, they said.
"When legislative defendants made the decision to redraw these congressional districts, they did it with one sole purpose: to harm voters," Hilary Klein, representing the North Carolina Division of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People plaintiffs, told the panel.
There was no legitimate purpose for the redistricting, and the process was in retaliation for prior litigation over 2023 map, she said.
The plaintiffs - two separate groups of voters and organizations who had challenged the 2023 congressional map - filed new complaints after the state's Republican-controlled General Assembly greenlit a new map in October intended to give the GOP an additional U.S. House seat in 2026.
Their challenge over the 2023 redistricting had gone to trial and the parties were awaiting a final judgment over if the legislature had acted with racial motives. Speaker of the House Destin Hall and Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger, both defendants, had contended that no racial data was used in the drafting process, even if the redistricting process had been politically motivated.
The panel challenged if political gain could be an illegitimate reason for redistricting.
"Does partisan redistricting harm voters?" U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Schroeder, a George W. Bush appointee, asked.
"They decided that the voters of Congressional District 1 did not pick the correct agenda," Klein said, calling the 2025 redistricting process retaliatory. She said it burdens voters to be moved into a new district.
The new map only impacted two congressional districts, both in northeastern North Carolina in an area called the black belt.
The 2025 map author, state Senator Ralph Hise, has vehemently denied that racial data was included in the drafting process, instead saying that the state Republicans were responding to President Donald Trump's redistricting call to maintain the Republican majority in the U.S. House. The mid-decade redistricting was intended to improve GOP political strength in eastern North Carolina, Hise told lawmakers.
Hise, who was called as a witness Wednesday, repeated that the sole goal of the process was partisan advantage and that no racial data was factored in.
"It is undisputed that the legislature did not use racial data in drawing these districts," Phil Strach, attorney for the legislative defendants, said Wednesday. "Senator Hise is not required to undergo a lobotomy to forget general characteristics of population demographics."
But the voters challenging the map said the legislature is attempting to create an "infinity loop" where it redraws electoral lines repeatedly to avoid a final judgment being issued on any one plan, which prevents their grievances from being redressed.
"The public interest and balancing of the equities are served by protecting the right of every North Carolinian to vote on equal footing," the voter plaintiffs said.
Klein called the 2025 map an escalation "where every time leading up to an election, [legislative defendants] will just pass a new map."
The General Assembly has the authority to draw congressional maps when they please, regardless of ongoing litigation, Strach said.
Kate McKnight, who also represented the legislative defendants, called the plaintiffs' case circumstantial. No majority-Black counties were removed in redrawing Congressional District 1 and 2, she pointed out, and none of the plaintiffs' experts say racial intent was present in redistricting.
The voters are unlikely to succeed on the merits of their case, the defendants said, as the legislature is legally allowed to politically gerrymander, even if the most loyal Democrats are Black, and even if the legislature is aware of that. They said there is no evidence that the redistricting process was racially discriminatory and voters were shifted into new congressional districts largely based on Trump's 2024 political performance in eastern districts.
"This is a circumstantial-evidence-only case," the legislative defendants wrote, asking for the injunction request to be denied.
Counsel for the two groups of plaintiffs asked for the panel to block the 2025 map and prevent it from being used in the 2026 midterms, instead asking for the 2023 map to be used. The parties are still waiting on a final judgment over if the 2023 map was racially motivated.
The panel, which also included Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Allison Rushing and U.S. District Court Judge Richard Myers II - both Trump appointees - seemed posed to uphold the use of the map for the 2026 elections, but said they would try to issue an order on the injunction request quickly. Any appeal of that decision would go to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The state's candidate filing deadline for the 2026 primaries ends Dec. 19, 2025.
"The panel is very engaged," Klein told reporters after the hearing concluded.
Representatives for the legislative defendants did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
Source: Courthouse News Service
