Samuel Ervin IV
Democrat | North Carolina
Candidate Profile*
Proven Activist
*Additional information appears below for educational purposes; however, only data received prior to the candidate deadline was considered during Panel Evaluation.
BIOGRAPHY
Name
Samuel Ervin IV
Party
Democrat
Election Year
2022
Election
General
Race
Supreme Court Justice, Seat 5
Incumbent
Yes
Links
EDUCATION
Candidate did not provide
WORK & MILITARY
Candidate did not provide
AFFILIATIONS
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
Candidate did not provide
Race
ENDORSEMENTS*
*These endorsements were received after the deadline and were not considered in the Panel Evaluations and are for additional educational purposes only.
LIBERAL (11)
*Daily Kos
Peoples Alliance PAC
*Replacements Ltd PAC
*North Carolina Advocates for Justice (NCAJ) PAC
*Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People
OTHER (3)
*North Carolina Fraternal Order of Police
*North Carolina Association of Defense Attorneys
*Wake County Voter Education Coalition
SELECTED CONTRIBUTIONS
LIBERAL
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (1)
State Democratic Party Organizations (2012)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (16)
Anita Earls (2012)
Daniel Clodfelter (2012)
Don Vaughan (2012)
Edward Phifer III (2012)
Gray Styers (2012)
OTHER INFORMATION
Justice Ervin has served on the North Carolina Supreme Court since 2015. Prior to that, he served on the North Carolina Court of Appeals from 2009-2015.
Notable Cases:
- N.C. State Bd. of Educ. v. State (2018): Signed Justice Morgan's majority opinion. Held that Article I, Section 6's requirement of three distinct branches of government read literally would prevent delegation of legislative authority, but that "problems which a modern legislature must confront are of such complexity that strict adherence to ideal notions of the non-delegation doctrine would unduly hamper the General Assembly in the exercise of its constitutionally vested powers" (23).
- Cooper v. Berger (January 2018). Wrote majority opinion. Held that a law combining the NC Board of Elections with the NC Ethics Commission into an evenly split bipartisan committee was unconstitutional because it prevented the governor from nominating a majority of its members from his party and thereby seeing that NC law was executed (43). This opinion includes a footnote that the presumption of constitutionality and standard of review did not require the court to "turn a blind eye to the functions appropriately performed by the leader of an opposition party" (33). The dissent argued that the majority stepped outside its authority (52) and misinterpreted McCrory to diminish the legislature's constitutional authority (44).
Info from Other Sources:
- Ballotpedia
- Ballotpedia's judicial partisanship study found Justice Ervin to be a Strong Democrat based on his partisan behavior before joining the Court
- Questionnaire Responses:
- The three key messages of Justice Ervin's campaign are 1) Each case should be decided based on the law, the facts, and nothing else. 2) Every person should be treated equally under the law. 3) Judicial officials should not have a partisan or political agenda.
- Justice Ervin said of the core responsibilities of the office, "The core duties of an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of North Carolina revolve around deciding cases involving difficult questions of North Carolina and federal law. I do not believe that judicial officials should espouse a particular political philosophy and think that, instead, they should strive to make sure that their work does not tend to suggest that they have one. Instead, unlike officials housed in the executive and legislative branches, members of the appellate judiciary are supposed to decide specific legal issues that arise in disputes between the parties in the cases that come before the court based upon an examination of the law, the facts, and nothing else and should treat everyone as equal under the law. Appellate judges, at least in my view, are not supposed to attempt to implement their own political or ideological views in the course of making judicial decisions and should, instead, simply apply the existing law to the facts in a dispassionate manner. I am very concerned about the fact that the courts are increasingly being viewed as just another partisan political institution, which is the exact opposite of what they are supposed to be, and that appellate judicial races seem to me to be getting more and more partisan with each new election cycle. I am running for re-election to the Supreme Court of North Carolina in order to stand up for the existence of an appellate judiciary which does what judges are supposed to do, no more and no less."
- Describing his judicial philosophy, Justice Ervin said, "My judicial philosophy is relatively simple. A member of the appellate judiciary has two essential tasks. First, he or she is called upon to decide legal disputes between citizens and citizens; citizens and business entities; multiple business entities; and citizens or business entities, on the one hand, and the State or state agencies, on the other. Secondly, members of the appellate judiciary are called upon to ensure that the legislative, executive, and judicial branches exercise the authority that is available to them subject to appropriate constitutional limits. I believe that the role of a judge in attempting to carry out both of these functions is to decide specific cases on the basis of the existing law and the properly-established facts without attempting to further any sort of political or ideological agenda. I believe that my record in judicial and quasi-judicial office demonstrates that I decide cases based solely on the law and the facts and that I do not attempt to implement any sort of political or ideological agenda as I go about my work."
- Ballotpedia's judicial partisanship study found Justice Ervin to be a Strong Democrat based on his partisan behavior before joining the Court
QUESTIONNAIRE
VALUES
I agree with Critical Race Theory (CRT) which asserts that the institutions in the United States are fundamentally racist.
Did not answer
Judeo-Christian values established a framework of morality that is necessary for our system of limited government.
Did not answer
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
Did not answer
What types of pro bono work have you done?
Did not answer
ABOUT YOU
What education or experience qualifies you to hold the office for which you seek election?
Did not answer
Why should the voters choose you?
Did not answer
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
Did not answer
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Justices should not interpret the federal and state constitutions as living documents, but should use a textualist and originalist approach to interpretation.
Did not answer
What is the proper use of legislative history in interpreting statutory law?
Did not answer
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Did not answer
How should a court address the balance between public health and individual freedoms in the time of a pandemic?
Did not answer
In light of the case Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include a prohibition on sexual-orientation discrimination, which justice’s opinion most closely aligns with your own opinion?
Did not answer
What role (if any) does a judge have in maintaining the separation of church and state?
Did not answer
Religious liberty is at risk in the United States and deserves the highest level of protection in the law.
Did not answer
When should a judge overturn past court decisions?
Did not answer
How should a judge determine which rights are protected by the Constitution even though they are not specifically mentioned?
Did not answer
What legal principles should a court consider when evaluating parents’ objection to their child obtaining medical procedures or drugs designed to affirm the child’s desired gender?
Did not answer
What principles should guide a court’s analysis of whether your state’s constitution gives terminally ill patients a right to assisted suicide?
Did not answer
Would you describe your judicial philosophy as originalist, living constitutionalist, or something else?
Did not answer
