Judges side with NC Gov. Josh Stein in challenge over filling judicial vacancies

Kyle Ingram, The Charlotte Observer on Jun 24, 2025

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

RALEIGH, N.C. — A panel of Superior Court judges sided with Democratic Gov. Josh Stein on Tuesday in his effort to block a new law limiting his ability to fill vacancies on the state’s appellate courts.

“Plaintiff has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that the amendments ... are unconstitutional and is entitled to judgment as matter of law on that claim,” the unanimous panel wrote in a brief order.

However, the court declined to block other sections of the bill that strip Stein of some authority over the Utilities Commission and Building Code Council.

Stein’s lawsuit, which was initially filed in February, targeted several provisions of a massive power shift bill — Senate Bill 382 — passed by the lame duck legislature last year in the final days of Republicans’ veto-proof supermajority.

The bill would have limited Stein’s ability to fill vacancies on the state’s Court of Appeals and Supreme Court by requiring him to pick from a list of three nominees selected by the political party of the departing judge.

In court filings, Stein argued that the change was unconstitutional and forced him to fill vacancies with judges “handpicked by partisan political operatives.”

Republican leaders, who defended the law in court, argued that the provision keeps courts aligned with the choices of voters.

“Closely aligning the affiliation of vacancy appointment to that of the vacating jurist maximizes — not diminishes — the integrity of the democratic process in North Carolina, where the people choose judges for themselves,” they wrote in legal filings. “The wisdom and timing of such a policy choice is for the Legislature, not for counsel or the courts.”

While the judges sided with Stein on this issue, they disagreed with his challenge to other appointment changes.

Part of SB 382 stripped Stein of his ability to appoint a majority of members to the Utilities Commission, giving one of his picks to the Republican state treasurer. Another section prohibited the Building Code Council from meeting or taking action without the support of the legislature’s appointees.

Stein argued that these changes violated the state constitution by chipping away at his executive powers, but lawmakers defended the shifts as a “legitimate exercise of the legislature’s plenary power to establish, organize, and reorganize state agencies.”

The court sided with the legislature on these matters without giving its reasoning.

The ruling comes just a month after Stein suffered a major court loss related to his appointment powers.

Another section of SB 382 stripped Stein of his authority to appoint members to the State Board of Elections, giving the power instead to the Republican state auditor.

A trial court initially found that law to be unconstitutional, but the state’s Republican-dominated appellate courts later reversed that ruling, allowing it to take effect.

_____