RALEIGH, N.C. â The campaign committee for North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein, facing trouble for a TV ad aired against a rival in 2020, plans to ask a federal court to block enforcement of a state law making it illegal to knowingly circulate false reports to damage a candidate's election chances.
The notice of appeal to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was filed Wednesday by the campaign's attorney. It comes a day after a trial judge refused to bar Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman from potentially using the law to prosecute anyone over the disputed commercial. Lawyers for Stein have argued the law is overly broad and chills political speech.
Recommended Videos
By challenging the state law, Stein may put himself in a bind between his public duties and his political future. Steinâs campaign committee argues that the statute is unconstitutional, noting one of the attorney generalâs chief jobs is to defend North Carolina laws in court. Stein, a Democrat, is a potential 2024 governorâs contender.
The law, which dates to at least 1931, makes it illegal to knowingly circulate false âderogatoryâ reports about candidates to harm them at the ballot box. Freeman's investigation stems from a September 2020 State Board of Elections complaint about the ad, which was filed against Steinâs committee by his then-challenger, Republican Jim OâNeill.
U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles, in canceling her July 25 emergency order that had stopped the lawâs enforcement, wrote Tuesday that the statute was permissible under the Constitution.
The ad talks about untested rape kits held by local law enforcement agencies, and a woman appearing in the commercial asserts that OâNeill âleft 1,500 rape kits sitting on a shelfâ in Forsyth County, where he's been district attorney since 2009.
Steinâs committee and two other plaintiffs sued last month to attempt to the have the law struck down as Freemanâs office prepared to take its investigation of the commercial to a state grand jury, according to legal briefs. No one has been charged in the case, and itâs unclear who specifically would have been a possible target.
OâNeill has said the 2020 ad was false because police agencies, not prosecutors, are responsible for testing rape kits. Stein, who defeated OâNeill by fewer than 14,000 votes in November 2020, has defended the ad's accuracy. He said it countered false accusations by OâNeill that he had failed to act on over 15,000 untested rape kits since becoming attorney general in 2017.
âThe voters deserved to be informed about the differences between how my opponent and I handled this critical public safety issue,â Stein said in a statement Wednesday. "I am confident that this statute will ultimately be struck down and we will move forward.â
After a state election board investigation, the matter was forwarded to Freemanâs office, after which the State Bureau of Investigation interviewed Stein, members of his campaign staff and the woman in the ad, who also worked in the attorney generalâs office, according to briefs.
Separately on Wednesday, the state Democratic Party wrote Freeman demanding that she investigate comments O'Neill made in the 2020 campaign's final months that it alleges were also false and derogatory. Party attorney John Wallace pointed to statements O'Neill made to the media, one that he said alleged Stein had âdone nothing about the rape kitsâ and another that alleged Stein had sued then-President Donald Trump over funding for a border wall with Mexico.
Freeman, herself a Democrat, âshould apply equal protection under the law and open an investigation," party spokesperson Kate Frauenfelder said.
In an emailed statement Wednesday evening, Freeman said the Democratic Party was requesting âunique treatmentâ but instead needed to follow the normal procedure in a campaign case by filing a complaint with the State Board of Elections.
Freeman recused herself from investigating Stein's ad, leaving it with a senior assistant DA in her office. She said Wednesday her recusal would remain for any other 2020 attorney general campaign case. O'Neill didn't have a comment Wednesday.
The law at issue is a misdemeanor offense, punishable by up to 60 days in jail with fines. Someone with an otherwise clean record would avoid active time if convicted. Time may be running out on any prosecution, as the statute of limitations on the count is two years.
Another state law says a public official convicted of the misdemeanor at issue in the lawsuit must be removed from office by a judge. This directive appears to conflict with a provision in the North Carolina Constitution in which someone like the attorney general can only be thrown out of office through impeachment and conviction by the General Assembly.