By Carolina Journal Staff
Republican National Committee and North Carolina Republican Party have filed their fourth lawsuit against the State Board of Elections in the last three weeks. The latest suit challenges the elections board’s decision to allow University of North Carolina digital identification to be used as voter ID in the upcoming election.
Other active lawsuits from the RNC and NCGOP challenge the state board’s voter roll maintenance, voter registration, and rules for submitting mail-in absentee ballots.
“The General Assembly enacted a detailed statute aimed at preventing electoral fraud by presentation of valid photo voter identification for in-person voting, as required by the Constitution,” according to the latest suit filed Thursday. “The law describes several physical photo voter identification items that a voter can produce to comply. Nowhere in that law, or related ones … did the General Assembly directly describe or indirectly permit the use of electronic forms of photo identification ‘to confirm the person presenting to vote is the registered voter on the voter registration records.’”
State board memos from September 2023 and February 2024 show that elections officials understood the limits on voter ID, the lawsuit argued.
“In spite of this obvious application of the law for almost a year, the three Democrat members of the NCSBE abruptly reversed course, less than three months before the November presidential election,” GOP lawyers wrote. “On August 20, 2024, by a three-two Democrat majority vote, the NCSBE approved allowing precinct workers to rely upon the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill’s digital student and employee identification. This UNC digital identification exists as an electronic record on a computer device.”
“According to the NCSBE, on August 19, an image of a photo ID on a computer device did NOT satisfy the law requiring ‘a voter shall produce any of the following forms of identification that contain a photograph’ to satisfy the voting procedures and vote. But on August 20, that somehow met the specific requirements of the law. The law never changed. The Court should, respectfully, curb the NCSBE from acting outside its statutory authority,” the lawsuit continued.
The August elections board vote was along party lines, with Democratic members Alan Hirsch, Siobhan Millen, and Jeff Carmon voting in favor, while Republican members Kevin Lewis and Stacy “Four” Eggers IV voted against the measure.
Lindsey Wakely, deputy general counsel for the elections board, told members that the Mobile UNC One Card for students and employees complies with statutory criteria after election staff reviewed the college’s application forms.
A printed card from the college was previously approved.
Wakely said a question was raised about the prohibition of using a photocopy or photo on a mobile device as a form of voter ID when voting in person in regards to UNC’s Mobile ID. She said the digital ID is neither, but is an official ID issued by the university.
“It’s not stored on the mobile device and is accessible (only) through Apple Wallet,” Wakely said. “They currently do not have cards available in any other application. But it works much the way a mobile credit card might work or a mobile transit card, or airplane ticket.”
Eggers had previously objected to Executive Director Karen Brinson Bell’s recommendation to allow the UNC ID to suffice as a voter ID, which prompted a vote at a meeting on the subject.
“What we’re being asked to approve here is an identification on a mobile app, and a mobile app is not an identification card,” Eggers said. “This is a different process we’re doing here than simply giving my friend my football tickets when I download them from the website. We’re talking about the requirements of the statute that there be an identification card, and in my reading of the statute, we simply don’t have the authority to do a mobile app in lieu of an identification card because that’s what this is.”
Eggers said it presents a number of concerns and issues related to it being a mobile app as opposed to a card, one of which is the ability to photocopy it, that there could be digital alterations to it, and that it could be passed as a screenshot between people. The board’s numbered memo 2023-3 states that a photo on a mobile device is not an acceptable form of identification.
“So, to say that a mobile app is an identification but a photo on the mobile app is not an identification is, I think, a confusing and inconsistent view of what we have done so far,” he added. “We’ve not done mobile apps anywhere else, so this really has nothing to do with whether it’s Chapel Hill or any other entity that has asked us for this. It is simply, are we going to approve a mobile app identification? Because I would point out we have previously approved the UNC student ID and the UNC employee ID related to this.”
Eggers cited a bill signed into law by Gov. Roy Cooper that will allow for a digital driver’s license in North Carolina possibly as early as 2025, that required a statutory change for the DMV to be able to offer that as an option. He said his reading of the statute for voter ID would require the statutory authority to allow for that as well. He said the physical card is a reasonable security measure, and the statute talks about protecting the equipment that produces the card, protecting the process of how the card has been acquired, while a digital card would have a software program. Eggers further asked if elections officials will have poll workers ask voters to adjust their screen brightness or have impediment issues related to whether a server was down or whether there were other issues about technology taking possession of someone’s phone.
“I think it is a bridge too far from the reasonable requirements as to whether this is a good idea or not, but more to the point, we simply don’t have the statutory authority for a mobile app to take the place of the identification card, so it’s my objection and I would note that I have not raised an objection to any other identifications that we’ve had over the course of the last three years,” Eggers told the board. “But this is a new and uncharted territory where we’re asked to approve a mobile app in lieu of the actual physical identification card that already exists or has already been approved.”
Bell said that other universities in the state that use digital ID and requested that they be used as a form of voter ID were rejected because they lacked some of the criteria they have with their ID approval process, including not displaying the expiration date, which UNC-Chapel Hill ID does have, and that it is not a copy or a photocopy.
Eggers said he wasn’t arguing about whether the card displays the expiration date. Bell replied that the university recognizes it as its official digital ID. Eggers countered that they may, but it is still a mobile app.
“Mr. Eggers raises a technical statutory interpretation question,” Hirsch said. “My own view is that there’s certainly enough flexibility within the statute for us to approve a digital card as a card. I think that’s the way of the world. I think everyone of a certain younger generation lives by that and they don’t carry cards.”
Hirsch said, for example, that when you board a plane, you no longer have to show a physical piece of paper and can use your phone as a boarding pass.
“I will say that’s a boarding pass, but if you go through security, they’re going to want a driver’s license or passport,” Eggers replied.
“Well, pretty soon, we’re going to have digital driver’s licenses as you know,” Hirsch replied.
“With a statutory change, that’s correct,” Eggers noted.
Millen said Egger’s view was a “little formalistic” since most young people use Apple Wallets, which is the same as using a credit card to purchase such things as groceries.
“I think the form that it’s in is not really the important thing,” Millen said. “Secondly, I’d like to note that if a student at UNC adds that mobile ID to their Apple Wallet, their physical card will no longer work to get into different buildings to get their meals, so it seems to me that that would make that card not a priority for the student to carry around. In fact, they might lose it under a pile of papers.”
She said since UNC-Chapel Hill jumped through a lot of hoops to meet the required criteria, the board should approve the ID.
Lewis, however, supported Eggers’ objection.
“I would ask you to point out to me where you find all this flexibility that you mentioned in the statute because I don’t see it,” he said. “I see some directions from the legislature that we ought to follow, and not trying to get creative and go above and beyond what the General Assembly has allowed. So unless the General Assembly were to add mobile apps or digital apps to this statute, I think we need to confine like every other card that we’ve approved is an actual card.”
The NCGOP responded to the vote on X , stating, “The NC State Board of Elections is playing more games with Election Integrity. Permitting a ‘Digital ID’ on its face VIOLATES Voter ID requirements, especially when many other options are readily available & funded by State Law. Rest assured — we won’t stand for it. #NCPOL.”
What’s the problem with just showing a physical ID card? Seems like the democrats are trying to figure out a way to cheat again. Cause that’s the only way they’ll be elected again. The last 4 years have been a dumpster fire because of their policies.
Another example of Republican’ts inventing an issue where there is none. There’s still no legitimate proof that there was any issue with the last election but we keep pounding that horse to see if we can get somebody to believe it. Like the orange idiot says if you repeat it enough people will believe it, soon the orange idiot will be spouting that immigrants are eating pets on the moon and MAGA NUTS will believe it.
Dems are always trying to bend the laws. Students should have other ID’s to legally vote. Too much room for error/fraud. You know there are students who aren’t citizens that go to universities, right?