GREENSBORO, N.C. (AP) — A federal judge refused Sunday to help in attempts to open early voting sites at three public North Carolina universities, declining requests to overrule decisions by Republican-controlled elections boards leading up to the state’s upcoming primary.
U.S. District Judge William Osteen rejected arguments by the College Democrats of North Carolina and some students that they were likely to win a recent lawsuit because decisions by GOP board members placed undue burdens on the right to vote.
The decision by Osteen — nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush — to deny a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order can be appealed.
Early in-person voting for the March 3 primary begins this coming Thursday. It features nomination races for U.S. Senate and House, the legislature and local elections.
Osteen also wrote that formally backing efforts to open the sites so close to voting could risk confusion.
Osteen’s ruling marks a key decision on policy preferences by the State Board of Elections and elections boards in all 100 counties since a state lawrecently shifted them from having Democratic majorities to Republican majorities.
The College Democrats of North Carolina — an arm of the state party — and four voters sued in late January accusing the state board and boards in Jackson and Guilford counties of violating the U.S. Constitution.
The lawsuit involves votes by the state board and the two county boards to not include early voting sites at Western Carolina University, the University of North Carolina at Greensboro and North Carolina A&T State University, also in Greensboro. A&T is the largest historically Black university in the country.
An early voting site at Western Carolina has operated regularly since 2016. Sites at the Greensboro campuses have been offered in recent presidential-year elections but not in midterm elections.
Voting sites are offered at college campuses elsewhere in the state. Same-day registration is available at early voting sites.
Without the sites, the lawsuit says, students will be forced to travel off-campus to vote, imposing time and money upon those least familiar with voting.
Lawyers for the boards defended the panels' actions, writing in legal briefs that there is no requirement boards must retain voting sites used in previous election cycles, and that site decisions were based on reasonable circumstances like parking access and past turnout.
FILE - A Vote Here sign is posted amongst political signs as people arrive to vote at the Rutherford County Annex Building, an early voting site, Oct. 17, 2024, in Rutherfordton, N.C. (AP Photo/Kathy Kmonicek, File)
LONDON (AP) — A proposed bill to allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales to choose to end their lives failed Friday as parliamentary time ran out following an effective filibuster by unelected lawmakers in the revising chamber that blocked the will of elected members.
Though the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was passed by the House of Commons last June, the House of Lords talked it out since then, stoking widespread criticism that it had overstepped the mark.
Proponents of what has been termed “ assisted dying ” — sometimes referred to as “assisted suicide” — hoped it would mark the biggest change to social policy in the U.K. since abortion was partially legalized in 1967. The intention was to put an end to the practice of those near the end of their lives from going to other countries, such as Switzerland, for an assisted death.
The bill had proposed allowing adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel.
But opponents in the House of Lords managed to hold up its passing by filing more than 1,200 amendments on a range of concerns, including the potential coercion of vulnerable people and a lack of safeguards for those with disabilities.
”The House of Lords scrutiny exposed this bill as ‘skeleton legislation’ riddled with gaping holes,” said Gordon Macdonald from the Care Not Killing campaign group which is opposed to a change in the law. “It is now clear that this bill was both unsafe and unworkable.”
The number of amendments is believed to be a record high for a piece of legislation that was brought forward by a backbencher rather than by the government. These so-called private members' bills can only be debated on a Friday as the government largely controls the rest of the parliamentary timetable, thereby limiting the time available.
Campaigners for assisted dying expressed their anger at the sight of unelected lawmakers holding up the will of the elected chamber. They have insisted that they intend to bring the bill back in the next parliamentary session, which begins after King Charles III outlines the government's upcoming program in a speech to both houses of Parliament on May 13.
The sponsor of the bill in the House of Lords, Charlie Falconer, said he felt “despondent” that a piece of legislation “so important to so many, has not failed on its merits, but failed as a result of procedural wrangling."
“Much more than letting ourselves down are the very many people who support the bill and who feel we have not treated them properly,” he said.
Lawmaker Kim Leadbeater, who introduced the Bill to the House of Commons in late 2024, said she was “trying to stay positive” while admitting “a real sense of sadness and sorrow today.”
She said there “will absolutely be appetite" within the Commons to bring the legislation back in the next session of parliament.
Last month, lawmakers in the Scottish Parliament rejected their own assisted dying legislation. Scotland has a semiautonomous government that has authority over many areas of policy, including health.
Assisted suicide — where patients take a lethal drink prescribed by a doctor — is legal in countries including Australia, Belgium, Canada, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland and parts of the U.S., with regulations on qualifying criteria varying by jurisdiction.
Campaigners hold a banner outside parliament in London as a proposed law to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales will run out of time on Friday, more than a year after MPs first voted in favour of it, Friday, April 24, 2026. (AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth)
A campaigner holds a banner outside parliament in London as a proposed law to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales will run out of time on Friday, more than a year after MPs first voted in favour of it, Friday, April 24, 2026. (AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth)
Campaigner Louise Shackleton holds a banner outside parliament in London as a proposed law to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales will run out of time on Friday, more than a year after MPs first voted in favour of it, Friday, April 24, 2026. (AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth)
A campaigner holds a banner outside parliament in London as a proposed law to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales will run out of time on Friday, more than a year after MPs first voted in favour of it, Friday, April 24, 2026. (AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth)
Campaigners hold a banner outside parliament in London as a proposed law to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales will run out of time on Friday, more than a year after MPs first voted in favour of it, Friday, April 24, 2026. (AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth)
