Internet Explorer 11 is not supported

For optimal browsing, we recommend Chrome, Firefox or Safari browsers.

Can a Judge Run for Office and Rule on Voter ID?

The judge overseeing North Carolina's state-level voter ID case opened court Tuesday by reading an unusual four-minute soliloquy into the court record in response to a Raleigh think tank questioning whether he should continue to preside over the trial.

The judge overseeing North Carolina's state-level voter ID case opened court Tuesday by reading an unusual four-minute soliloquy into the court record in response to a Raleigh think tank questioning whether he should continue to preside over the trial.

 

"A publication has attempted to cast aspersions on my ability to preside over this case fairly and impartially and attempted to cast aspersions on me personally," Superior Court Judge Michael Morgan said. "The publication has therefore concluded that I should recuse myself from further involvement in this matter."

 

Morgan did not name the publication in question, although he was clearly referencing the Civitas Institute, which has posted an online petition titled, "Mike Morgan: Recuse yourself from voter ID trial!" Civitas is a nonpartisan but conservative think tank that draws funding from donors who also back Republican candidates and causes.

 

Morgan ruled Tuesday that the state court trial should be put on hold unless the U.S. Supreme Court upsets lower court rulings and reinstates voter ID. That means there won't be any action in the state case in the short run, although it could fire back up at any point.

 

Civitas' complaint centers on the fact that Morgan is running for state Supreme Court in this fall's election. While that race is nonpartisan, it is often colored by partisan factors. Morgan is a Democrat and is running against incumbent Justice Bob Edmunds, a Republican. The voter ID ruling could affect turnout in the race.

Caroline Cournoyer is GOVERNING's senior web editor.