College Democrats drop lawsuit over early voting sites
The College Democrats of North Carolina have dropped their lawsuit against state and local election officials over early voting sites on college campuses. The student group filed a notice of voluntary dismissal Sunday.
The dismissal arrived one week after a federal judge declined to grant an injunction that would have forced election officials to add early voting sites at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, North Carolina A&T State University, and Western Carolina University.
The one-sentence notice of dismissal indicates it was made “without prejudice.” That means a lawsuit could be filed again at a later date.
US District Judge William Osteen denied College Democrats’ request for an injunction that would have added campus voting sites for primary election early voting that started Thursday. An injunction “would risk causing voter confusion,” according to Osteen’s Feb. 8 order.
The College Democrats filed suit along with four individual students, working with Democratic operative Marc Elias’ law firm.
“First, based on the preliminary factual record before it, this court cannot find that plaintiffs have established standing such that this court can grant the preliminary injunctive relief they seek,” Osteen wrote in his 14-page order.
Osteen also labeled the requested injunction “problematic” because mandating the early voting sites would require action from the three campuses. Those campuses are not part of the College Democrats’ lawsuit against state and local elections boards.
“[T]hose universities are independent entities that are not party to this case and not subject to this court’s equitable powers,” the judge wrote.
The court order also invoked the Purcell principle, which says “federal courts ordinarily should not enjoin a state’s election laws in the period close to an election.”
“[T]he 2026 midterm primary is ‘close at hand,’ with the early voting period to start in less than a week and election day less than a month away,” Osteen wrote. “Among other potential disruptions or unfair consequences, this court would risk causing voter confusion were it to issue a preliminary injunction now.”
Osteen also determined that he “cannot find” that the plaintiffs are likely to win their case. It presents “novel legal issues,” and the federal appellate court has not addressed a standard for addressing the students’ claims under the 26th Amendment to the US Constitution.
“[T]his court finds that Plaintiffs have not established that Defendants’ decision not to locate early voting sites at WCU, UNC-G, and NC A&T imposed a ‘material burden on [their] exercise of the franchise,’” the judge wrote.
The order also explained that Osteen “cannot find” that the students are likely to succeed in their claim that the absence of early voting sites creates an “undue burden” on their rights under the First and 14th Amendments.
“[T]his court does not find that the burdens on Plaintiffs to be severe, and, further, this court does not find that the burden on Plaintiffs outweighs the legitimate state interests advanced by Defendants’ allocation of early voting sites,” he wrote.
The state elections board filed a brief emphasizing the timing of the plaintiffs’ legal action.
“Plaintiffs were on notice of potential changes to their counties’ expected early voting sites since the Guilford and Jackson Boards were unable to unanimously approve plans on November 18, 2025, and December 9, 2025, respectively,” the state elections board’s lawyers wrote. “The State Board adopted the Plans on January 13, 2026. Plaintiffs fail to address their two-week delay in filing a complaint, or their subsequent delay in seeking an injunction. Plaintiffs’ delay belies any claim of urgency.”
“Plaintiffs simply cannot square their delayed litigation choices with the extraordinary and time sensitive relief now sought,” the court filing continued.
“The 2026 election is ongoing,” the state elections board’s brief added. “Relevant here, public notice of the locations and schedule for early voting was first given by January 16, 2026, and county boards provided notice of buffer zones for electioneering at early voting sites by February 2. Logic and accuracy testing for voting machines is underway. Early voting begins on February 12, with the daily requirement to report vote totals, … and political parties with candidates on the ballot can appoint observers for early voting sites a day before they will serve.”
“These deadlines run concurrently with the cascade of other operative events that the State and county boards must complete before election day, each of which are contingent upon established and predictable operations,” the court filing continued. “This should give the Court pause in considering Plaintiffs’ Motion, as the Supreme Court has ‘repeatedly emphasized that lower federal courts should ordinarily not alter the election rules on the eve of an election.’”
The Guilford County elections board challenged the plaintiffs’ description of the case’s facts in a separate court filing.
“Plaintiffs frame NCSBOE’s early-voting plan as the ‘closure’ or ‘elimination’ of campus early-voting sites, because early-voting sites were operated at NCA&T and UNCG in recent presidential election cycles,” the Guilford brief explained. “According to Plaintiffs, the absence of campus early-voting sites during the current midterm primary election is a ‘targeted effort to discriminate against young voters.’ This framing is incorrect, for two key reasons.”
“First, GCBOE has never operated early-voting sites at NCA&T or UNCG for midterm primaries. Like the current plan, there were no early-voting sites at either campus in the 2022, 2018, 2014, 2010, 2006, and 2002 midterm primaries (and none in the midterm general elections either),” the board explained. “The status quo is that the campuses do not host early-voting sites during midterm election cycles.”
Second, the plaintiffs focused only on the college voting sites. Guilford County offered 17 early voting sites in the 2024 primary election and 28 in the general election. “Extending Plaintiffs’ flawed logic to the facts would mean that NCSBOE’s plan actually ‘closed’ either seven or 18 sites across Guilford County, not two,” according to the brief.
The Jackson County elections board filed its own brief highlighting Western Carolina University students’ access to early voting. “Jackson County will operate four early voting sites during this election cycle, one of which will be just over a mile-and-a-half from Western Carolina University’s Campus,” according to the brief. “Western Carolina University will also provide a shuttle service for students to access the early voting site at the Cullowhee Recreation Center.”
“The Twenty-Sixth Amendment does not, as Plaintiffs claim, protect their right to vote early or protect their right [to] same-day voter registration at early voting sites,” the Jackson elections board’s brief continued. “In fact, the Constitution does not provide Plaintiffs, or anyone, with those rights at all. Similarly, Jackson County BOE’s decision to consolidate its early voting locations in the Cullowhee area does not violate Plaintiffs’ First or Fourteenth Amendment Rights and such decision passes a rational basis review.”
“Second, Plaintiffs cannot show that they are likely to suffer irreparable harm. To date, Plaintiffs can still register to vote, request a mail-in ballot, vote early and register to vote at early voting locations, and ultimately vote on election day,” the court filing added.
The plaintiffs filed a motion in late January seeking an injunction for the three campus early voting sites.
“The Twenty-Sixth Amendment prohibits states from abridging the right to vote on the basis of age,” the students’ lawyers wrote in a court filing. “States violate that prohibition when they intentionally target young voters for disfavored treatment, as they did here. And the First and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit states from unjustifiably burdening the right to vote. The site closures here will unquestionably impose severe burdens on the voting rights of Plaintiffs and young voters like them. But no matter the severity of the burden, the site closures cannot pass constitutional scrutiny because the justifications offered for them are woefully insufficient.”
The students’ suit filed Jan. 27 in federal court targeted the North Carolina State Board of Elections and the Guilford and Jackson County elections boards. Republicans hold 3-2 majorities on the state and local boards. In each case, Republican board members at the local and state level outvoted Democrats who supported on-campus early voting sites.
Each affected campus hosted an early voting site during the 2024 presidential election cycle.
“Contrary to the views of Defendant Eugene Lester, the Guilford County elections board chair, voting is a right of citizenship — not a privilege,” the students’ lawyers wrote. “This case is about targeted efforts to place additional, unnecessary, burdensome, and ultimately unjustifiable obstacles between students at three North Carolina universities — including the nation’s largest historically Black university — and this fundamental constitutional right.
The three campuses “serve over 40,000 students,” according to the complaint. “For multiple election cycles, those students have been able to vote early at early voting sites on their campuses. Having that on-campus access has been no mere convenience — it has been critical for overcoming the barriers that student voters face when they attempt to access the franchise, including lack of personal transportation, unfamiliarity with off-campus geography, demanding class and work schedules that leave little time for travel, and limited financial resources. For many students, on-campus early voting enables access to the franchise.”
“Moreover, because same day voter registration is available at early voting sites and not election day polling sites, the on-campus accessibility was critical to ensuring not only that registered voters were able to vote, but that young North Carolinians who were voting for the very first time or updating their voter registration were able to do so in time to participate in the state’s elections.”
The students opposed the state elections board’s Jan. 13 decision not to have early voting sites on those campuses this year. “Along the way, state and county officials brushed aside urgent warnings that their decisions would disproportionately burden young and Black voters and denigrated students who advocated for their rights,” according to the lawsuit.
“These closures intentionally target the rights of young voters,” the lawsuit claims.
The students characterized arguments against the campus early voting sites as “troubling” and “thin.” “Guilford County officials cited low turnout and claimed resources would be better spent on communities deemed more politically engaged, a characterization that is especially fraught for students at NC A&T and UNC-G, both of which serve large numbers of Black voters,” according to the lawsuit. “Meanwhile, officials in Jackson County cited cost savings and logistical issues that simply don’t hold up to scrutiny. Lacking any legitimate justifications for the closures, state and county election officials flippantly dismissed student concerns by declaring that university students are ‘adults’ who are too capable and mobile to need voting sites on campus.”
“The real reason for the elimination of on-campus early voting at these universities appears to be a judgment that student voters — and disproportionately Black student voters — do not deserve the same level of accessibility as other voters in their counties,” the students’ lawyers wrote. “That judgment contradicts the Constitution and basic principles of equal treatment.”
“College Democrats drop lawsuit over early voting sites” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.
![[WBT107.9FM] app promo graphics 2025](https://wbt.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/84/2025/12/17653898024341.jpg?quality=80&strip=all&w=150&crop=0,0,100,150px)
