« Some speculations about the great crime decline in Florida | Main | Could Setser case be a SCOTUS sleeper rather than a sentencing snoozer? »

November 30, 2011

Veto debate follows NC legislature's vote to repeal state's capital Racial Justice Act

As reported in this local article from North Carolina, debate over the repeal of the state's controversial Racial Justice Act has now shifted from the state's legislature to the state's Governor's office.  Here are excepts of the story:

The state's prosecutors and Republican lawmakers rejoiced at Monday's Senate vote to repeal the heart of the Racial Justice Act.  Now attention turns to the governor.  Will she veto it or not?

In 2009, Gov. Bev Perdue signed the bill into law in a public ceremony flanked by key Democratic lawmakers, members of the African-American caucuses in the General Assembly and the NAACP.  She proclaimed that the new law, which allowed convicted murderers to use statistical arguments to get off death row, would help prevent racism in prosecution and sentencing.

Perdue, speaking at an event Tuesday in Charlotte, did not tip her hand. She said she would be talking to crime victims' families. "I'm a real strong supporter of the death penalty," Perdue said. "We should not allow discrimination based on race, poverty or any other factor to infect the criminal justice system. I'm thinking about it hard."

Even though the governor faces a tough re-election bid next year and wouldn't want to appear soft on crime, supporters of the Racial Justice Act are cautiously optimistic that will she stay firmly in the territory she staked out two years ago.

House Minority Leader Joe Hackney, in a statement Tuesday, said Perdue probably would veto the bill.  Democratic Sens. Doug Berger of Youngsville and Floyd McKissick of Durham said Tuesday they are optimistic she will use her veto stamp.  "We're fairly sure she's going to veto," NAACP attorney Al McSurely said. "Her support was critical in getting (the Racial Justice Act) passed."

Perdue has 30 days to decide.... If she vetoes, then the General Assembly probably will be ripe for another override fight.  It's not certain legislators can muster the votes, however.  The Senate might not have any trouble overriding the veto....  A party-line vote with everybody present would give senators more than enough to override.  

It would be harder in the House, where 72 votes are needed. The House mustered 64 Republican votes in favor of the bill, while all 52 Democrats voted against it; three Republicans were absent. House GOP leaders would need a scenario in which they retain all those votes and perhaps woo all five renegade Democrats who have broken ranks with their party on other issues. That would eke out 72 votes, but it's unlikely.

Campaigns are under way already to sway the governor.  The NAACP called on her to veto and also called on the House Democrats to stick together to resist an override.  People of Faith Against the Death Penalty issued a public statement Tuesday night calling on Perdue to veto.

The N.C. Conference of District Attorneys has been working for a long time to take the statistical evidence wording out of the Racial Justice Act.  The prosecutors will ask Perdue to sign the bill, SB9, Executive Director Peg Dorer said Tuesday.

Some older and newer related posts on the North Carolina Racial Justice Act: 

November 30, 2011 at 09:33 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Veto debate follows NC legislature's vote to repeal state's capital Racial Justice Act:


nice. But too little! too late! this doesn't stop all those lawsuits that were filed UNDER the law when it was the LAW!

Posted by: rodsmith | Nov 30, 2011 3:23:06 PM

rodsmith, your position is being debated here in nc. What is the argument underlying your position that a repeal does not stop current motions from going forward and your authority?

Posted by: bruce cunningham | Nov 30, 2011 5:15:39 PM

hmm off the cuff 200+ plus years of criminal law in this country! You have to use the law in effect at the time the crime occured!

This is the same thing! The lawsuits were filed WHILE IT WAS LEGAL to do so! While the change in the law might stop any new ones. IT can't toss the old ones that were LEGAL when filed!

Just look at that junk over the so-called terrorists in cuba. The congress passed new laws to keep their law suits out of the courts. BUT it couldn't do a thing for the ONES ALREADY filed!

Posted by: rodsmith | Dec 1, 2011 12:33:24 PM

also just look at all the screaming about the changing of the time given for crack cocaine! They changed the law and lowered the time...... but they ARE NOT letting those convicted BEFORE it out now! what they got was legal UNDER the LAW AT THE TIME!

or look at all the cases coming out of texas over old arson convictions. We have 10's of thousands of convictions using so-called expert testimony from arson and scientists over shaken baby syndome. Now 10-20 years later we know most of them were talking out their asses when on the stand. but NOBODY is going back over those cases NOW.

It's the same thing.

Posted by: rodsmith | Dec 1, 2011 12:38:09 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB