North Carolina's long fight over who controls state government appointments is now fully briefed at the state's highest court. On Friday, October 30, Democratic Governor Josh Stein and the Republican leaders of the General Assembly filed their final written arguments in two separation-of-powers cases, Stein v. Berger and Stein v. Hall, and the North Carolina Supreme Court has set aside two and a half hours for oral arguments on November 10 — exactly one week after the November 3 general election.
Source: Carolina Journal via EIN News
No ruling has been issued, and Friday's filings decide nothing by themselves. But they close the written phase of a dispute that will determine how much appointment power North Carolina's governor actually holds — over judges, and over the boards and commissions that set rules for utilities, construction, the environment and state spending.
What the two cases are about
The first fight is over judgeships. For generations, when a seat opened on the North Carolina Supreme Court or Court of Appeals, the governor could appoint any qualified person to fill it. Senate Bill 382, passed by the Republican-led legislature in late 2024 over then-Governor Roy Cooper's veto, changed that: the governor must now choose from three names supplied by the political party of the judge who is leaving. Stein's lawyers argue that Article IV, Section 19 of the state constitution reserves the appointment of appellate judges to the governor, and that lawmakers cannot dictate the selection process.
The second fight is over boards and commissions. Stein is challenging laws that restrict his appointments to state boards and commissions — bodies that influence utility rates, building and construction standards, environmental rules and economic incentives. The legislative leaders, Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger and House Speaker Destin Hall, defend the statutes: their October 30 reply brief argues that the legislature may distribute appointments among elected executive officers and other appointing bodies, and that reassigning statutory duties does not interfere with the governor's constitutional powers.
Five former governors weigh in — for the governor
The most striking filing in the case did not come from either side. In September, all five living former governors of North Carolina asked the Supreme Court for permission to file a joint friend-of-the-court brief backing Stein: Democrats Roy Cooper, Bev Perdue and Mike Easley, and Republicans Pat McCrory and Jim Martin. Two Republicans are, in effect, defending a Democratic governor's hiring power, arguing that the office — not the party holding it — is what the constitution protects. Constitutional experts John Orth and Charles Plambeck filed a separate brief making a similar argument, that the General Assembly has no constitutional right to restrict these appointments.
The pushback is not one-sided. Republican State Treasurer Brad Briner has filed in court challenging Stein's executive-power arguments, and the legislature's lawyers point to the state Supreme Court's own recent precedent: in an earlier round of this litigation, the court held that a trial court had misapplied precedent, and rejected the theory that the constitution vests executive power in the governor alone, noting that North Carolina has a plural executive shared with other elected Council of State officers.
North Carolina governors and legislatures have fought over appointment powers for roughly a decade, through lawsuits over the elections board, cabinet confirmations and agency boards. Democrats have held the governor's office for 28 of the last 32 years while Republicans have controlled the legislature since 2011 — so each side has written rules while expecting the other to live under them.
Why this reaches beyond Raleigh
Appointment power sounds abstract until it sets a price. The boards in this dispute touch utility regulation, residential building codes, environmental management, transportation and economic-incentive deals — decisions that show up in electricity bills, housing costs and factory siting across North Carolina. The state's newest budget law, passed this summer, pushes the shift further: by the NC Chamber's accounting, the governor will lose authority over 84 appointments while the General Assembly gains 24 and Council of State offices gain 35. Whatever the court decides on November 10's arguments will either bless that direction or draw a constitutional line under it.
For the growing Punjabi and South Asian communities in the Raleigh-Durham and Charlotte metros — including trucking and logistics families along the I-40 and I-85 corridors — these are the boards that shape warehouse and transport policy, building rules for new homes and businesses, and the utility costs every household pays. Who appoints them decides whose priorities those boards serve.
What happens next
The Supreme Court will hear two and a half hours of oral argument on November 10 in Raleigh. A decision will come later — the court has given no date — and it will bind future governors of both parties, not just Stein. Awaaz Punjab will report the argument and the ruling when it lands.