Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP

This case arose from a challenge by the North Carolina NAACP to the state’s voter photo identification law. The State Attorney General, a Democrat, declined to continue defending the law on appeal. Consequently, the President Pro Tempore of the North Carolina Senate, Philip E. Berger, and the Speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, Timothy K. Moore, sought to intervene as defendants to protect the statute. The District Court and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied their motion to intervene. The legislative leaders petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that they were entitled to step in when the state’s executive officer refused to provide a vigorous defense for a duly enacted state law.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in favor of the legislative leaders. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion, holding that the North Carolina legislators were entitled to intervene as of right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2) because their interest in defending the validity of state legislation is not adequately represented by existing parties when the attorney general abandons the defense.

Whether state legislative leaders have the right to intervene in federal litigation to defend a state law when the state attorney general, as the designated legal representative, chooses not to pursue a robust defense on appeal.

The ruling significantly strengthened the ability of state legislatures to defend controversial laws in federal court when state executive officials, such as attorneys general, refuse to do so. It altered the dynamics of separation of powers among state branches and has direct implications for highly polarized litigation over election laws, abortion regulations, and other politically charged statutes, effectively giving legislatures an independent voice in court.