Anita Earls

A Story of Anita Earls: A Short Video via Duke University’s John Hope Franklin Humanities Institute

Justice Earls founded the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, a nonprofit organization that describes its work as focusing on “civil rights, social justice, and community empowerment,” including litigation and advocacy involving voting rights, criminal justice, and access to legal resources.

In McKinney v. Goins (2025), in which Justice Earls agreed with the Courts' result only, upholding the SAFE Child Act provision that allowed victims of child sexual abuse to bring civil claims that had already expired under the statute of limitations. The decision allowed these previously time-barred lawsuits to proceed during the two-year window created by the Act. Earls agreed with the result but disagreed with parts of the majority’s constitutional reasonin

In Howell v. Cooper (2025), in which Justice Earls dissented, arguing that North Carolina bar owners had not shown a constitutional violation from Governor Cooper’s COVID-19 restrictions. The majority allowed their claims to proceed, holding that the businesses had presented sufficient facts to challenge the restrictions under the state Constitution’s protections for the right to earn a living. The Court's decision allowed the businesses’ lawsuit over the COVID-19 shutdown orders to continue rather than dismissing it at the pleading stage. Earls disagreed with this decision.

N.C. State Conf. of NAACP v. Moore (2022) in which Justice Earls authored the majority opinion addressing constitutional amendments proposed by the Republican-controlled General Assembly in 2018. At the time, 28 legislative districts had been ruled unconstitutional racial gerrymanders, and new maps had been ordered. Shortly before elections under the new maps, the existing legislature narrowly approved amendments concerning voter ID and the income-tax cap. Voters approved both amendments in November 2018. The Court reversed and remanded for further proceedings on whether the amendments could stand.

In the Harper v. Hall cases (2022–2023), in which Justice Anita Earls joined the majority in the first two decisions and dissented in the third, the North Carolina Supreme Court considered whether the state constitution allows courts to strike down election maps as unconstitutional partisan gerrymanders. In Harper I, the Court held that extreme partisan gerrymandering violates the North Carolina Constitution and ordered new maps. In Harper II, the Court ruled that the revised congressional map still violated the constitution and required further changes. In Harper III,  the Court held that partisan gerrymandering claims are political questions that courts cannot decide. Justice Earls; however, dissented, arguing that the Court abandoned settled precedent because its membership had changed and eliminated an important constitutional safeguard, leaving voters without a judicial remedy against unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering.

For more information on Harper v. Hall, see:

• Heritage Foundation: New NC Supreme Court Majority Overturns Prior Majority’s Unconstitutional Interference in Redistricting

In Hoke County Board of Education v. State (2022), in which Justice Earls joined the majority opinion, the court considered whether a trial court could order the State to take action after finding that students were not receiving a constitutionally required “sound basic education.” The Court held that courts could enforce constitutional requirements and allowed the remedial process to continue. In Hoke County Board of Education v. State (2026), in which Justice Earls dissented, the court considered whether the trial court had authority to continue enforcing the education plan. The majority held that the trial court lacked authority to continue the case, while Justice Earls argued the court could continue reviewing enforcement of the constitutional education requirement.