NC voting

santheo / Flickr

Early voting begins Thursday for local government elections, and many North Carolina voters may be surprised to hear they can register and vote at the same time. That's because some changes from the state's 2013 election overhaul are on hold as lawsuits play out.

Flickr/Vox Efx

The U.S. Justice Department and others suing over North Carolina's 2013 election overhaul are looking to settle one part of their case: voter ID.

The fate of North Carolina's voting overhaul is now in the hands of a federal judge, after a three-week trial wrapped up Friday in Winston-Salem. The overhaul cut the early voting period by a week, eliminated same-day registration, and prohibited the counting of out-of-precinct ballots. Federal judge Thomas Schroeder had a variety of questions for those suing and defending North Carolina. WFAE's Michael Tomsic was in the courtroom and joined Jennifer Montague to discuss closing arguments.


The federal trial over North Carolina's sweeping election overhaul wraps up Friday in Winston-Salem. The U.S. Justice Department, the North Carolina NAACP and others have built their case against the state over the past three weeks of trial. 

Google Earth

North Carolina's attorneys continue their defense of the state's sweeping election overhaul in federal court Thursday morning. On day 12 of the trial Tuesday, they offered expert testimony that the 2013 changes put North Carolina in line with the majority of states. WFAE's Michael Tomsic was in the courtroom in Winston-Salem and joined Marshall Terry to discuss the latest.

Google Earth

Voter fraud, the DMV and North Carolina's chief justice were all part of the arguments Thursday in the federal trial over the state's election overhaul.  The U.S. Justice Department, the North Carolina NAACP and other plaintiffs are suing the state over the 2013 changes, which included cuts to early voting and the elimination of same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting. WFAE's Michael Tomsic was in Winston-Salem for day nine of the trial and discussed it with Marshall Terry.

Michael Tomsic

As the federal trial over North Carolina's election overhaul continues in Winston-Salem this week, one word has come up over and over again: disenfranchised. The U.S. Justice Department, the state NAACP and others contend the changes disenfranchised some African-Americans in 2014.

Lawyers suing North Carolina have called more than a dozen witnesses to testify about how they were deprived of their right to vote.

Reverend Moses Colbert from Cleveland County was one of them. The 60-year-old African-American went to vote early during last year's midterm election.

On day two, the trial over North Carolina's election overhaul touched on the state's long history of racial discrimination and its brief debate over sweeping voting changes. The U.S. Justice Department, the League of Women Voters and others suing North Carolina used a mix of personal stories and expert testimony in Winston-Salem on Tuesday.

One of the major accusations is that state lawmakers intentionally discriminated against minorities when they passed the changes two years ago. How did that argument play out in court yesterday?

Michael Tomsic / WFAE

The federal trial over North Carolina’s sweeping election overhaul began Monday in Winston-Salem with pointed accusations in court and a massive march right outside it. The U.S. Justice Department, the North Carolina NAACP and others are suing the state. They accuse Republican lawmakers of taking aim at several voting methods that minorities disproportionately relied on.

Kandice Phelps and about 70 other young people rode buses from Salisbury to the march. Phelps is a 17-year-old African-American who plans to be the first from her family to go to college. 

Google Earth

A federal trial starts in Winston-Salem on Monday morning that will have big implications for voting rights in North Carolina and, potentially, across the country. The U.S. Justice Department and several groups are suing North Carolina over the sweeping election overhaul it passed two years ago. Federal appeals court judges have already indicated that some of the changes likely violate the Voting Rights Act.