RALEIGH — A statement on immigration activities in North Carolina issued on social media by North Carolina Supreme Court Associate Justice Anita Earls, a Democrat, has drawn criticism for its perceived partisan nature.
Earls’ statement said, “I cannot be silent while the constitutional rights of our neighbors are being violated right here in North Carolina.”
She also said there were “reports of federal agents stopping and seizing lawful residents and immigrants with no criminal records, causing many North Carolinians to be fearful of leaving their homes, going to work, sending their children to school, shopping for food, or getting medical attention.”
Earls also claimed, “These agents are being pulled off cases investigating sex trafficking, child abuse, and terrorism,” before calling the immigration enforcement actions a “political stunt” that “further erodes the public’s trust in the already broken justice system.
“The willingness of this administration to abandon the prosecution of serious crimes simply in service of political theater and to scapegoat immigrants is appalling. This is not who we are as a nation, and it’s not who we are as North Carolinians.”
Both state Supreme Court Associate Justice Phil Berger Jr. and Earls’ 2026 reelection opponent, Rep. Sarah Stevens (R-Surry), criticized Earls’ statement.
Berger responded directly to Earls’ post on X, stating in part that, “blanket assertions about law enforcement action not before a particular judge is irresponsible.”
“What undermines public confidence is not lawful enforcement activity, but the growing trend of judges asserting their personal opinions and positions without facts, without parties before them, and without the neutrality their office demands,” Berger wrote. “Judges are not political commentators, and we are not supposed to be advocates. When we speak as if we are, we blur boundaries.
“The rule of law depends on judges who apply the law as written, not as they wish it to be, and Americans deserve a justice system where public officials, from law enforcement to supreme court justices, act in accordance with the rules and refrain from prejudging situations based on ideology. That’s how you safeguard rights and protect liberty.
“There is currently a lot of noise in the public sphere about trust in the judiciary. For those serious about it, they should insist that judges model the discipline we expect of those charged with impartial application of the law.”
In statement to North State Journal, Stevens said, “Sadly, Justice Earls prefers to base her opinion on news reports instead of facts.”
“Justices should refrain from commenting on any case that may appear before the Court. Justice Earls’ bias is evident,” said Stevens. “I’m running for the Court to ensure we have Justices who enforce our laws without bias. Sadly, that is lost on Justice Earls.”
A request for comment on Earls’ statement sent to the media contact for the North Carolina Court System has not yet been answered.
“Justice Earls yet again inserted her radical left politics where they don’t belong and continues to show disregard for judicial ethics,” the NCGOP said in a statement to North State Journal. “Next year, she will be replaced by a Justice who follows the law instead of the woke mob.”
This is not the first time Earls’ comments have drawn fire.
On Aug. 15, 2023, the North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission initiated an investigation into Earls following a June 2023 interview with the legal news outlet Law360.
The commission sent a letter to Earls, which in part said that her comments “appear to allege that your Supreme Court colleagues are acting out of racial, gender, and/or political bias in some of their decision-making,” which potentially violated part of the North Carolina Code of Judicial Conduct.
The letter cited the Code of Judicial Conduct’s Canon 2A requires judges to act “at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.”
The commission suggested that implying bias without “definitive proof” could undermine public trust in the judiciary, and the probe stemmed from one or more anonymous complaints, with potential outcomes ranging from a cautionary letter to recommendations for censure, suspension, or removal.
In the Law360 interview, Earls discussed “systemic” issues in the state’s judiciary, claiming there was a lack of racial and gender diversity among law clerks and advocates appearing before the court.
She also criticized her Republican colleagues.
“The new members of our court very much see themselves as a conservative bloc,” Earls said during the interview. “They talk about themselves as ‘the conservatives.’ Their allegiance is to their ideology, not to the institution.”
During the interview, Earls complained about “implicit bias” in courtroom interactions, and the decision to end implicit bias training by Chief Justice Paul Newby when Republicans took over the majority on the court. She prefaced those comments by stating she was co-chair of former Gov. Roy Cooper’s post-George Floyd “Racial Equity and Criminal Justice task force” that had recommended the implicit bias training.
“I am co-chair of the Governor’s Task Force on Racial Equity and Criminal Justice, [created] following George Floyd’s murder in 2020,” Earls said during the Law260 interview. “One of our first recommendations was that all judicial system actors have implicit bias and racial equity training.”
Cooper’s task force has been a line of attack by Republicans and his likely opponent in the 2026 U.S. Senate race, Michael Whatley, to spotlight Cooper’s “soft on crime policies” in the race to fill the state’s U.S. Senate seat in 2026.
In response to the commission’s investigation, Earls filed a federal lawsuit in late August 2023 claiming the investigation violated her First Amendment rights on protected political speech on matters like diversity and equity, as well administration of justice. She also claimed the 5-2 Republican majority was trying to “silence” dissenting voices on the court.
A federal district judge and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals both denied Earls’ requests for a preliminary injunction. The following January, the commission dismissed the complaint without any discipline recommendations, and Earls voluntarily dropped the lawsuit.
During the lawsuit against the commission, Earls was represented by Triangle area attorney Pressley Millen, who North State Journal reported as being the husband of sitting North Carolina State Board of Elections member Siobhan Millen. The connection was made while covering an ethics complaint lodged against state Supreme Court Associate Justice Allison Riggs.
Millen was also initially Riggs’ attorney during the legal battle over her seat in the 2024 state Supreme Court race. Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin, a Republican, had filed election challenges following Riggs narrow win and requested Millen’s wife recuse herself from hearing those challenges.
Riggs was a Cooper appointee to both the state Court of Appeals and to the Supreme Court. Riggs and Earls were partners at the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, a law firm which has sued the state multiple times over redistricting and voting rights.
