Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redistricting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
North Carolina House approves mid‑decade congressional map, sponsor says it adds a Republican seat
Summary
The House passed Senate Committee Substitute Senate Bill 249 to realign congressional districts, approving changes that sponsors said strengthen Republican performance in eastern North Carolina; opponents said the map fractures communities and risks Voting Rights Act litigation. The second‑reading recorded vote was 66‑48.
The North Carolina House of Representatives on Oct. 22 passed the committee substitute to Senate Bill 249, a mid‑decade congressional redistricting plan the bill’s sponsor said will increase Republican performance in eastern North Carolina.
Representative Jones, the bill’s floor sponsor, told colleagues the House followed a defined process and instructed consultant Blake Springhetti to avoid using racial data. “We established clear written standards … data identifying the race of individuals or voters shall not be used in the construction or consideration of districts in the 2025 congressional plan,” Jones said, and argued the result “moves NC‑1 … to increase the Republican vote share” and will help elect an additional Republican member of Congress.
Opponents raised process and legal concerns. Lawmakers citing public submissions said more than 12,000 comments were filed and argued those views were not meaningfully considered. Multiple members said the proposed map splits and dilutes historically Black communities in eastern North Carolina — the so‑called Black Belt — and warned the plan likely will be subject to Voting Rights Act litigation. “This bill redraws Congressional District 1 in a way that doesn’t just shift boundaries. It fractures communities,” a member opposing the bill said.
Floor amendments were offered and debated. Representative Morey presented an alternative map intended to produce a roughly 7‑7 partisan split; the amendment failed in a recorded vote, 46 in favor and 67 opposed. Later the chamber voted on the committee substitute: the machine recorded 66 in favor and 48 opposed on second reading, and the bill was read a third time and passed. The House ordered the committee substitute enrolled for presentation as required by the rules.
Supporters framed the vote as exercising the legislature’s constitutional authority to redraw districts; critics framed it as a partisan power play that ignores public input and risks legal challenge under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Members who raised constitutional or procedural objections had those protests noted in the record.
The bill’s next procedural step is enrollment and presentation consistent with legislative practice; the transcript records the enrolled bill prepared for presentation to the secretary of state and related enrollment messages.
