Quantcast

North Carolina Supreme Court justice loses effort to block investigation

LEGAL NEWSLINE

Friday, November 29, 2024

North Carolina Supreme Court justice loses effort to block investigation

State Supreme Court
Webp earlsanita

Earls | https://www.nccourts.gov/

GREENSBORO, N.C. (Legal Newsline) - A federal judge has agreed with the North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission that a lawsuit brought by a state Supreme Court justice against it shouldn't be heard in his court.

Justice Anita Earls accused the commission, which is the governing body for North Carolina judges, of retaliating against her for her comments on diversity. She says it initiated an investigation after she spoke publicly about a lack of judicial clerks from racial minority groups.

She filed for an injunction against the commission's investigation, but the commission argued in October that federal court wasn't the proper forum for her complaints.

"(T)he proceeding is ongoing; North Carolina has a vital interest in protecting the integrity of its judicial system; and the Commission's proceeding offers Plaintiff adequate opportunity to raise her First Amendment challenges," the commission's motion to dismiss says.

"Finally, there are no extraordinary circumstances that would justify the Court's interference in the ongoing proceeding."

On Nov. 22, federal judge William Osteen denied Earls' motion for preliminary injunction, saying nothing in the state proceeding will prevent her from making her case there.

"Plaintiff only presents unsupported, conclusory allegations that the Commission is not following procedure, and those allegations do not demonstrate a likelihood of any irregularity in the Commission's actions," Osteen wrote.

The commission says it sent Earls a letter notifying her of a confidential probe on Aug. 15, but she chose not to have the issue sorted in private and instead filed suit in federal court.

The commission had already initiated an investigation on March 20 into allegations Earls revealed confidential deliberations from a Supreme Court conference. Three months later, in an article in Law360, Earls expressed her concern over what she sees as a lack of diversity in the state's courts, prompting the second investigation.

Earls said in the article that "new members of our court very much see themselves as a conservative block" with an "allegiance... to their ideology, not to the institution."

Even if he weren't to abstain from Earls' federal lawsuit, Judge Osteen wrote Earls has not shown a likelihood of success that would warrant an injunction against the state investigation.

Earls is planning an appeal.

More News