Gov. Josh Stein's challenge to election power shift goes before NC appeals court

Kyle Ingram, The News & Observer on Feb 10, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

A panel of judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals on Tuesday heard arguments in Democratic Gov. Josh Stein’s challenge to a major power shift that stripped him of his appointments to state and local election boards.

Attorneys for Stein argued that the power shift — which transferred appointments to Republican State Auditor Dave Boliek — sets a dangerous precedent for separation of powers, wherein the legislature can consistently reassign responsibilities to whichever executive office holder agrees with their policy preferences.

“The legislative position is that there are no limits on their power to assign executive duties on the Council of State,” Eric Fletcher, a lawyer for Stein, said. “They say that they can assign, tomorrow, election administration to the Commissioner of Agriculture. That they can send agricultural policy to the Commissioner of Insurance. And they can assign road-building to the Superintendent of Public Instruction.”

Attorneys for legislative leaders argued that it was within the General Assembly’s duty to reassign executive powers as they please, so long as the powers in question are not explicitly assigned in the constitution.

“Absent that, this is a set of statutory officers that are set by law; the power to appoint them is set by law and can be reassigned by law,” Matthew Tilley, an attorney for the legislature, said.

The panel, which included two Republican judges and one Democrat, gave little insight into which way they would rule, though the court has ruled against Stein before in the case.

The controversy began shortly after Stein’s landslide 2024 victory against Republican Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson. State lawmakers quickly introduced Senate Bill 382, which stripped a variety of powers not only from Stein, but other incoming Democrats like Attorney General Jeff Jackson.

In the final days of their legislative supermajority, Republican lawmakers overrode then-Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto, enacting the law shortly before Stein took office.

Stein sued and initially won at the trial court level, with a panel of judges agreeing that the law was unconstitutional.

But the Court of Appeals quickly stepped in and blocked that ruling, allowing the law to take effect on May 1.

Since then, Boliek has used his new powers to appoint Republican majorities on the State Board of Elections, as well as all 100 county board of elections.

Those new board members have already spent months in office, making decisions about early voting sites, candidate eligibility and even ousting the state’s longtime executive director.

The Court of Appeals did not indicate when it would issue a ruling in Stein’s case.