A federal judge has rejected an attempt by Democrats to force early voting sites onto three public university campuses in North Carolina, refusing to override decisions made by Republican-led elections boards just days before early voting begins.
U.S. District Judge William Osteen ruled Sunday against requests from the College Democrats of North Carolina and several students who argued that the boards’ decisions placed unfair burdens on student voters. Osteen declined to issue either a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order, meaning the existing voting plans will remain in place. His decision can be appealed.
Early in-person voting for the March 3 primary begins Thursday and includes races for the U.S. Senate, House, the state legislature and local offices. Osteen also noted that ordering new voting sites so close to the start of early voting could create confusion—because nothing says “election integrity” like changing the rules at the last minute.
The ruling comes after a recent shift in control of North Carolina’s elections boards from Democratic majorities to Republican majorities under a new state law. The lawsuit targeted decisions by the state board and county boards in Jackson and Guilford counties not to set up early voting sites at Western Carolina University, the University of North Carolina at Greensboro and North Carolina A&T State University in Greensboro.
The plaintiffs argued that without on-campus sites, students would have to travel off campus to vote, which they said would cost time and money and disadvantage those unfamiliar with the voting process. A&T, the largest historically Black university in the country, was also included in the case.
An early voting site at Western Carolina University has been used regularly since 2016. Sites at the two Greensboro campuses have been available in recent presidential elections, but not during midterms. Other college campuses across the state will still have voting sites, and same-day registration remains available at early voting locations.
Lawyers for the elections boards responded that there is no legal requirement to keep voting sites from previous elections and said the decisions were based on practical considerations such as parking access and past voter turnout.
Judge Osteen agreed that the plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed in proving their case and declined to intervene.
The bottom line: the courts aren’t buying the argument that election boards must bend the rules for one group of voters, especially at the last second. The primary will proceed under existing plans, and voters will still have access to early voting and same-day registration across the state.
It’s a reminder that elections are run by law, not by political pressure—and that’s exactly how a fair system is supposed to work.
