Send this page to a friend -- Email the Editor

BY FLORENCE GILKESON: Senior Writer

State legislative leaders called it a victory last week when the N.C. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a provision in the 2003 redistricting legislation.

But a spokesman for the North Carolina Republican Party advised Monday that the case might yet return to the court system.

“Don’t be surprised if we do file another complaint,” said Bill Peaslee, chief of staff for the state GOP.

Peaslee said the Republicans who filed the original complaint were “stunned” upon learning that the plaintiffs would be required to refile their complaint if it is to be considered by the three-judge panel provided for in the redistricting legislation.

“We’re scratching our heads too,” Peaslee said. “We respectfully disagree, but it is the Supreme Court, after all.”

The state Supreme Court on Thursday announced its unanimous decision concerning the constitutionality of a three-judge panel to hear challenges to redistricting plans.

“Obviously, we are very pleased with the court’s decision,” said House Co-Speaker Richard Morgan in a statement released Thursday. “Throughout this process, we have been confident that the redistricting legislation enacted by the General Assembly is constitutional and in compliance with the law.

“Our position has already been affirmed by the Bush administration’s U.S. Justice Department, the U.S. District Court and a state superior court. Now it has been affirmed by the North Carolina Supreme Court.”

The Supreme Court’s decision was regarded as a victory for legislative leaders, including Morgan and Co-Speaker Jim Black, a Democrat.

“With respect to redistricting, the General Assembly is pitching a no-hitter,” said Rep. Joe Kiser, House Republican leader. “We have succeeded at every turn.”

Rick Eddins, Republican co-chairman of the House Redistricting Committee, attributed the General Assembly’s continued success to hard work and careful analysis in developing the legislation.

“It’s no surprise that the court has upheld the legislation,” Eddins said. “We were mindful of the judicial powers set out in the constitution and were careful to maintain the proper balance.”

Roger Knight, an attorney on Morgan’s staff in Raleigh, said opponents of the 2003 redistricting maps would be required to file a new complaint in Wake County Superior Court for the matter to be continued.

“It was a favorable opinion for us,” Knight said. “We are very, very happy.”

Knight was speaking on behalf of Morgan, who was out of town and could not be reached for comment.

The complaint filed by the state GOP and by key Republican opponents to Morgan dates back to a 2001 challenge of redistricting plans adopted by the legislature about four years ago. A group of dissenting Republicans challenged those maps and took the case to Judge Knox Jenkins in Johnston County Superior Court.

Jenkins ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and said that the plan adopted by the legislature did not comply with the state Constitution because it unnecessarily split too many counties in developing districts.

He worked on another plan and sent it back to the legislature, which did further tweaking before returning it to the judge for approval. He tweaked a little bit more before giving his approval.

However, Jenkins noted that the redistricting plan would be temporary and in effect only for the 2002 election, because the state Constitution says redistricting is a job for the legislative branch, not the judiciary.

The General Assembly tackled the issue in a special session in November. Once again, a group of dissident Republicans took the matter to court, this time arguing, among other things, that the redistricting legislation was not legal because it provided for disputes to be resolved by a three-judge panel. They argued that the redistricting dispute should be returned to the Superior Court judge who ruled on the initial complaint three years ago, not by a panel named by the chief justice of the Supreme Court.

In its ruling last week, the Supreme Court upheld the concept of the panel. The high court ruled that “the General Assembly has recognized the unique nature of these infrequent but potentially divisive cases and has set out a workable framework for judicial review that reduces the appearance of improprieties.”

At the same time, the Supreme Court ruled that the litigation originally filed to challenge legislative redistricting plans in 2001 is no longer an ongoing case. That litigation is known as the Stephenson case. The second complaint was dubbed Stephenson II.

“The (Stephenson) case is over,” the court said.

Peaslee said Monday that the Supreme Court decision was “inexplicable to us,” and he acknowledged that under that ruling, the state GOP and the other plaintiffs must file a new complaint.

“It is our contention that the 2003 redistricting maps do not abide by the North Carolina Constitution, as interpreted in Stephenson I and Stephenson II,” Peaslee said. “No court has looked at the 2003 maps for compliance with the state constitution.”

The GOP chief of staff said the issue is not compliance with the U.S. Constitution but compliance with the North Carolina Constitution.

Apparently the state GOP has not made a decision about filing a new complaint, although there are hints that such an action is being considered.

Litigation over redistricting has brought about a three-month delay in primary elections, moved from the first Tuesday in May to July 20. The filing period did not open until Monday.

The Supreme Court ruling delivered a further complication through the revelation that a new complaint must be filed. It had been assumed that the ruling means that the complaint will go directly to the panel as soon as Chief Justice I. Beverly Lake Jr. appoints its three members.

However, the ruling is being interpreted to mean that the plaintiffs must go back to the drawing board and refile their complaint, even if it is identical to the previous one. Legal experts say that Lake will not appoint the panel until a new complaint is filed.

Under the legislation, the chief justice would appoint one Superior Court judge to represent the western part of the state, one for the east, and one in Wake County, site of the state capital.

Key plaintiffs include state Rep. Leo Daughtry of Johnston County, a Republican and longtime foe of Morgan.

Although one aspect of the case involves accusations that the 2003 maps are unfair to Republicans, especially those regarded as enemies of Morgan, the Supreme Court is now largely made up of Republican justices. Lake is a Republican.

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals, the state’s highest appellate bodies, are now elected on a nonpartisan basis, and political affiliation is not supposed to be a factor in their services.

Justice Bob Edmunds penned the decision returned by five of the seven justices last week. Justices Mark Martin and Robert Orr did not participate.