The Rules Review Commission approved changes to North Carolina's election rules on Thursday, but some of the provisions were delayed after receiving enough objections that they required legislative review.
The rules, which had already been approved last month By the State Board of Elections in a 3-2 vote, they modify procedures related to mail-in voting, photo identification, and conduct at polling places.
The rule on photo identification and the one related to conduct at polling places received at least 10 written objections, the threshold set by state law to delay their adoption and refer them to the Legislature.
The rule regarding mail-in voting had not yet reached that threshold, although the deadline for filing objections remains open until 5:00 pm on Friday.
What does this mean for the November elections?
The legislative review could prevent some of the new rules from taking effect before the November elections.
If it so decides, the General Assembly could return on August 31, September 28, and again on October 26, 2026, to authorize the changes. according to the session schedule.
However, lawmakers have said they plan to return to session on November 16, following the November 3 elections.
The leaders of both legislative chambers did not respond to questions from Enlace Latino NC on whether they would reconvene before the vote to consider these changes.
What would the new rules change?
The most controversial changes are related to the absentee ballot, the acceptance of exceptions for ballots without photo identification and the rules at polling places.
Absentee ballot
One of the main groups of changes relates to absentee ballots.
The approved rules classify the problems that an absentee ballot may present into three categories. Each has a different consequence for the voter:
- "Correctable" deficiencies, such as the lack of a voter's signature, allow the county board to notify the voter and give them the opportunity to correct the error.
- "Uncorrectable" deficiencies, such as the lack of a witness's signature, require the ballot to be cancelled and a new one issued.
- Irregularities, which must be documented but do not require any additional action on the part of the voter.
For example, if a voter returns their ballot envelope without sealing the inner envelope, even if the outer envelope is sealed, the new rule could require them to restart the absentee voting process. This would be instead of allowing them to correct the problem on their original ballot.
photo identification
The requirement to present photo identification remains the same. The change lies in what happens when a voter arrives at the polls without one. acceptable identification and requests an exception.
Currently, a five-member electoral board requires a unanimous vote to reject such an exception. The new rule would allow it to be rejected with a simple majority of three votes.
For example, if a voter says they lost their ID and uses the exception provided by law, three of the five board members could determine that the explanation does not meet the requirements and reject it.
That change could make it easier for a provisional ballot to be rejected when the majority on the county board, currently Republican-majority, deems the exception invalid.
Related: How many votes didn't count in North Carolina because they didn't have a photo ID?
Voting centers
The new rules establish in greater detail what activities are permitted around the voting centers.
The changes include the regulation of buffer zones around polling places and restrictions on certain political activities.
It would also be prohibited use of devices to amplify sound, like loudspeakers, in those areas.
For example, those who want to distribute political information near a polling station would have to do so within the permitted areas and without a loudspeaker.
Discussion at Thursday's meeting
Six people spoke out against the proposed measures during the meeting.
Among them was Kathy Martin of Democracy Out Loud, who questioned the authority of the State Board of Elections and county election boards to adopt certain changes.
“My main objections revolve primarily around authority,” Martin said.
Martin particularly questioned the provisions that would allow a Republican majority to make decisions on electoral matters. In his view, some of those powers could exceed the authority granted by the Legislature.
During the meeting, commission member Jeff Hyde asked Adam Steele, attorney for the State Board of Elections, about concerns expressed by citizens regarding election activity zones around polling places, and their potential conflict with state law establishing a 50-foot buffer zone.
Steele explained that the law establishes a protected zone near the entrances of polling places, where campaigning is prohibited. He also explained that it requires county election boards to designate an additional campaign activity zone.
“You have your protected zone and your election activity zone,” Steele said. “That way, there aren’t people wandering around the parking lot, which creates a security problem,” he noted.
Steele also said that the chief judges at the polling centers could expand the designated zones if the volume of voters required it.
Republish our stories for free on your website or newspaper. We follow the Creative Commons license. Click the box and follow the instructions.
