Fight on voting districts likely headed to court

North Carolina, which has seen more litigation over choosing by casting votes districts than almost any other state, appears headed toward yet another round of justice fights. U.S. Rep. Mel Watt as well as the legal adviser to the state NAACP Tuesday questioned the legality of brand new Republican-drawn congressional choosing by casting votes districts. Meanwhile, Republicans, wary of President Barack Obama's Justice Department, devise to seek federal approval for brand new choosing by casting votes districts in justice as well as from the administration. "There's inevitable litigation coming," pronounced Damon Circosta, executive director of the N.C. Center for Voter Education. "And the Republicans are starting to look for what they feel is the most friendly jurisdiction." Watt's 12th Congressional District was the most litigated in the country during the 1990s as well as the subject of 4 cases which went to the U.S. Supreme Court. Redistricting lawsuits delayed N.C. elections in 1998 as well as 2002. Watt, the Charlotte Democrat, pronounced the GOP devise appears to violate the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which is designed to forestall the dilution of minority choosing by casting votes strength. Specifically, he criticized the proposed addition of minority electorate to his district. The 12th now has the black voting-age race of 43 percent. The proposed district would raise which to 49 percent. "It represents the unsatisfactory bid by the Republicans to dilute as well as minimize the domestic influence of African-American electorate in the Piedmont by packing all of them in to the 12th District so none of them have influence in adjoining districts," Watt pronounced in the statement. "(It's) the sinister Republican bid to use African-Americans as pawns ... to gain partisan, domestic gains in Congress." Shift in the east Anita Earls, executive director of the Durham-based Southern Coalition for Social Justice as well as adviser to the state NAACP, pronounced the GOP devi! se could hurt black electorate in five eastern counties. Now represented by Democrat G.K. Butterfield, an African-American, those electorate would pierce from the 1st District to the 3rd, represented by Republican Walter Jones. "The question are those (voters) worse off?" Earls said. "And we think they are because they're no longer able to select the candidate of their choice." Sen. Bob Rucho, the Matthews Republican who chairs the Senate Redistricting Committee, has pronounced all along the districts would be "fair as well as legal." "We would not have submitted (the plan) if it had not been legal," he said. On Monday lawmakers are expected to release proposals for brand new General Assembly districts. They're scheduled to vote on all the districts later this month. Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue cannot veto redistricting plans. Preventing 'pre-clearance' Changes to choosing by casting votes districts in North Carolina as well as 15 other states must be approved by the Justice Department or federal court. Traditionally, which has meant "pre-clearance" by Justice. But Republicans in North Carolina, like those in other states, devise to go to the courts during the same time. Rucho called the Obama Justice Department "probably the most politicized ... of any that's been seen in the past." Other states, including Virginia, have pursued the same dual strategy. Rucho pronounced it's designed to ensure early approval of the brand new districts as well as forestall any delay in the 2012 elections. Hans Von Spakovsky, the senior legal fellow during the Heritage Foundation as well as the former Justice Department lawyer, said, "Any Republican-controlled state would be ridiculous not to go to court." "The idea which North Carolina is starting to get the fair, unbiased review from (the Justice Department) is highly unlikely," he said. "If they're in court, they're starting to get the fair review as well as Justice isn't starting to be able to fool around games." In court, he argues, both ! sides wo uld get the chance to present arguments. The Justice Department could simply send the state back to the drawing board. In 2003, in order to expedite pre-clearance, the state went to justice the day after lawmakers passed brand new legislative districts. A few months later, the federal district justice in Washington issued the consent order approving the plans. But it was the Justice Department last month which approved Virginia's brand new legislative districts, drawn in part by which state's GOP-controlled House. Von Spakovsky pronounced that's because the department knew the justice was seeking over its shoulder. Democrats say Republican fears are overblown. "At the end of the day, they're all afraid of something that's not there, which is which the Justice Department is starting to throw out maps just because they were drawn by Republicans," pronounced Paul Smith, the Washington profession who represents Democrats in redistricting cases. "I don't think that's plausible." Jim Morrill: 704-358-5059 Subscribe to The Charlotte Observer.