Unexpected Legal Battle Emerges Over North Carolina’s Digital Student IDs

Lawsuit document with gavel, pen, and open book.

Republicans sue North Carolina over digital student IDs for voting, citing election integrity concerns.

At a Glance

The Republican National Committee (RNC) has filed a lawsuit against North Carolina’s elections board
The lawsuit aims to block the use of digital student IDs from UNC-Chapel Hill for voting
Republicans argue that state law mandates IDs to be in physical form, not digital
The GOP claims digital IDs could enable ineligible voters to cast ballots
This is the fourth lawsuit filed by the RNC against the State Board of Elections in three weeks

RNC Challenges North Carolina’s Digital ID Decision

The Republican National Committee (RNC) and the North Carolina Republican Party (NCGOP) have taken legal action against the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE) over its recent decision to allow digital student IDs for voter identification. The lawsuit, filed in Wake County Superior Court, specifically targets the board’s approval of the “Mobile UNC One Card” from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill as a qualifying ID for voting purposes.

The NCSBE’s decision, made by a 3-2 vote on August 20, reversed a previous rule that only physical and plastic photo ID cards were acceptable for voting. This move has sparked a heated debate about election integrity and the interpretation of state voter ID laws.

Republicans Argue Digital IDs Violate State Law

The crux of the Republican argument lies in their interpretation of North Carolina’s voter ID law. The GOP contends that the law explicitly requires identification to be in a physical, tangible form. They argue that digital IDs, accessible through devices like smartphones, do not meet this criterion.

“The law doesn’t allow the state board ‘to expand the circumstances of what is an acceptable student identification card, beyond a tangible, physical item, to something only found on a computer system,’ the lawsuit reads.”

The lawsuit further argues that acceptable forms of voter ID should include physical items such as passports, driver’s licenses, and other tangible identification cards. Republicans claim that allowing digital IDs could potentially enable ineligible voters to cast ballots in the upcoming November 5, 2024 election, a concern that’s particularly pressing given North Carolina’s status as a battleground state.

Security Concerns and Verification Challenges

Another key argument presented by the Republicans is the potential security risks associated with digital IDs. The lawsuit suggests that electronically stored voter photo identification may be easier to alter compared to physical, tangible items that election officials can physically inspect.

The plaintiffs also contended that electronically stored voter photo identification may be “easier” to alter rather “than [a] physical, tangible item that precinct official can hold in her hands and inspect.”

This concern extends to the verification process at polling stations, where Republicans argue that digital IDs could pose challenges for precinct officials in accurately confirming a voter’s identity. The lawsuit claims that these issues could potentially compromise the integrity of the election process.

State Board’s Defense and Ongoing Legal Battles

In response to the lawsuit, a State Board attorney has argued that there is nothing in the law that specifically limits approval to printed cards. This interpretation suggests that the board believes it has the authority to approve digital forms of identification that meet the necessary security and photo requirements.

The current legal challenge is part of a broader series of lawsuits filed by the RNC and NCGOP against the State Board of Elections. In fact, this is the fourth such lawsuit in just three weeks, with other legal actions addressing issues such as voter roll maintenance, voter registration, and mail-in absentee ballot rules.

As North Carolina gears up for what promises to be a closely watched election in 2024, the outcome of this lawsuit could have significant implications for voter accessibility and election security. The case underscores the ongoing national debate over the balance between making voting more accessible and maintaining the integrity of the electoral process.