North Carolina Governor Powers Amendments Proposed by Democrats

On Wednesday, eight Democratic lawmakers unveiled three constitutional amendments during a press conference in Raleigh, aiming to reverse years of legislative encroachment and restore transparency to North Carolina's judicial oversight system. Governor powers took center stage. And it's after nearly a decade of Republican-led efforts to systematically strip authority from the governor's office, always occupied by a Democrat during that period.

It's a hard reality. Right out of the gate, sponsors acknowledged this: with Republicans holding majorities in both the North Carolina House and Senate, these bills stand little chance of passage in the current legislative session. But the calculus here isn't about immediate victory because it's really about laying groundwork for a political future that looks very different from the present.

Republicans won't always be in the majority, and when they're not, they're going to suddenly think these are great rules," said Rep. Phil Rubin, the primary sponsor of one bill. "So let's do them now.

A Governor Stripped of Traditional Authority

North Carolina governor powers have been hollowed out through a relentless series of legislative maneuvers stretching back years. Experts have long maintained that Republican power grabs thwarted the will of voters, removing the Democratic governor's control or partial control over numerous boards, entities, and executive prerogatives. The result, by multiple assessments, is the nation's weakest chief executive.

They've defended the shifts. They point out voters also elected a GOP legislative majority, but executive branch wasn't designed to be subordinate arm of the legislature, and the accumulated restrictions have fundamentally altered the balance of power in Raleigh.

It's government by ambush. Rubin's measure bars the legislature from stripping additional gubernatorial powers and blocks majority leaders from what he calls government by ambush, the practice of springing major legislation on the minority and the public without notice. And voters should have "the opportunity to secure their constitution, demand absolute transparency in lawmaking and ensure that people, not backroom deals, have the final say," Rubin said.

Sunlight for the Judicial Watchdog

The two other constitutional amendments target corners of the judicial system that have operated largely out of public view. Rep. Marcia Morey authored a measure that would make disciplinary hearings and sanctions by the Judicial Standards Commission public. Current GOP rules cloak the commission's work in secrecy, shielding its proceedings from outside scrutiny.

A majority-Republican court quashed them. But behind closed doors, the majority-Republican state Supreme Court quashed the commission's recommendations that two Republican judges who admitted to egregious conduct violations be publicly reprimanded. Spokespeople for the North Carolina Supreme Court and the Judicial Standards Commission wouldn't comment on the matter.

"Who makes decisions about discipline and who appoints the decision-makers are critical to making the system fair and effective."

It's not just about fairness. Morey's bill would restructure who appoints the commission's members, a step she called critical to preventing the "weaponization" of its work, and currently Republican legislative leaders and Paul Newby, the state's conservative chief justice, appoint a majority. But in 2023, Newby encouraged the commission to investigate a Black Democratic justice who had criticized his decision to effectively shut down a racial equity commission, and he and court spokespeople declined to comment.

Dividing Appointment Power

Under Morey's proposal, commission appointments would be split equally among three entities:

• The chief justice of the state Supreme Court
• The governor
• The North Carolina State Bar

So it's vulnerable. Morey argued that no single branch or party would hold the levers of judicial discipline and that the current concentration of appointment authority makes the system vulnerable to partisan manipulation.

Recusal Rules and Financial Transparency

The third bill, sponsored by Rep. Deb Butler, would disqualify state Supreme Court justices from hearing cases in which family members are parties. Justice Phil Berger Jr. Has drawn controversy by ruling in multiple cases where his father, the leader of the state Senate, is a defendant in his legislative capacity. Berger referred recusal requests on these cases to the Republican majority on the Supreme Court, which ruled he could participate.

It's undisclosed. Investigative findings revealed that Chief Justice Newby did not disclose a trip to a luxurious Hawaiian resort paid for by a conservative judicial education program. Butler's measure would also compel justices to disclose more information about large stock transactions, outside sources of income, and sponsored travel, and Newby and court spokespeople didn't respond to requests for comment about the nondisclosure.

Restoring Public Confidence

"People deserve complete confidence in the integrity of their court," Butler said, describing her bill as an effort to restore public trust that has eroded under the weight of secrecy and perceived conflicts of interest.

It's not just about conduct. And it aims to reshape the structural incentives that allow ethical questions to fester in darkness; the logic is straightforward: if the public can see how judges are disciplined, who funds their travel, and when they recuse themselves, the system becomes harder to game.

The Long Game in a Swing State

The silence was notable. Republican leaders in the House, Senate, and court system didn't respond to requests for comment on the bills. So it's not surprising the majority has shown little appetite for reforms that would constrain its own authority or open its processes to greater public inspection.

If the bills somehow clear the legislature, voters would have the chance to weigh in during the November ballot. The sponsors are realistic about the odds. If the measures fail this session, they plan to revive them in the next one, by which time even some Republican strategists believe a blue wave may have flipped the North Carolina House.

So Morey spoke. He said, "We're committed to following through on these bills to ensure fairness and impartiality in our courts and legislature, and this should be the norm, not the partisan bias we have now.

So the eight Democrats see constitutional amendments as long shots in short term, but they draw clear line about this year's political map and the debate over North Carolina governor powers will continue beyond this session. It's defining future engagement rules.