Confederate Statue At NC Courthouse Must Stay, Panel Says

The North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that local officials can't get rid of a Confederate statue outside a county courthouse, finding the statue is protected by a state law barring the removal of historic monuments.

In a published opinion, the three-judge panel found the 30-foot tall statue of a Confederate soldier that sits in front of the Alamance County courthouse in Graham, North Carolina, falls within the state's Monument Protection Law, which prevents the removal of historic monuments on public property except under specific circumstances.

As such, the panel said, Alamance County officials have "no authority to move the monument" in the face of public pressure.

"Regardless of some commission members' comments or misunderstandings of their legal ability to move the monument, the rule of law does not change," the opinion states. "At all times, the Monument Protection Law has required the county to leave the monument in its current place. Defendants' hands are tied — even if they wanted to move the monument, they could not."

As a result, the panel affirmed summary judgment favoring the Alamance County Board of Commissioners and rejected arguments by the NAACP, several residents and local advocacy groups that sought removal of the statue, which depicts an armed soldier with an inscription to "Our Confederate Soldiers" and is engraved with a pair of Confederate flags.

In their lawsuit, the NAACP had asserted claims for several violations of the North Carolina Constitution, including the equal protection clause, and misuse of taxpayer money. Though it survived dismissal, Superior Court Judge Forrest D. Bridges ultimately granted summary judgment to the county after finding officials were bound by the monument law.

The NAACP then appealed, arguing it was unconstitutional to continue to maintain the monument despite the message it sends to Black residents about the administration of justice in Alamance County.

During oral arguments in November, counsel for the NAACP noted the monument sits in proximity to where a prominent Black citizen was lynched in 1870, and that speakers at the dedication ceremony in 1914 described its purpose as the commemoration of the white "race and blood." The NAACP referred to it as a monument to white supremacy as opposed to an object of remembrance for military service protected by the monument law.

But Tuesday's panel disagreed, saying the statue sits on public property and "commemorates military service that is part of North Carolina's history." Service in the Confederate Army counts as military service in the eyes of the federal government, the panel said, and North Carolina also recognizes "Confederate Memorial Day" as a public holiday.

There are few exceptions to the Monument Protection Law, none of which apply to the statue at the Alamance County courthouse, the appeals court said, adding that the trial court otherwise correctly determined that the statue was not being maintained with a discriminatory purpose.

According to the opinion, the commissioners' intent in deciding not to relocate the statue is "irrelevant."

"Even if some of the defendants had a discriminatory intent, as alleged by plaintiffs, that intent was not the reason that the monument has remained in front of the courthouse — the monument has remained in place because the Monument Protection Law forbids defendants from moving the monument," the panel said.

County commissioners were also justified in using taxpayer dollars for law enforcement to respond to protests at the monument and to erect a fence to protect it, the appeals court found, calling them "expenditures for public safety and protection of county-owned property" that "serve a public purpose."

Finally, the panel rejected the NAACP's claims that the upkeep of the monument violates the Open Courts Clause because it sends a negative message to Black residents.

"We conclude that the Open Courts Clause does not prohibit the placement of an object of historical remembrance in or around a courthouse, though some may find offense," the panel said.

Counsel for Alamance County directed a request for comment to a county representative, who declined to comment Tuesday. Counsel for the NAACP did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Judges Donna Stroud, Chris Dillon and Valerie J. Zachary sat on the panel for the North Carolina Court of Appeals.

The NAACP is represented by Mark C. Fleming, Ronald C. Machen Jr., Karin Dryhurst and Marissa M. Wenzel of WilmerHale, Stuart M. Paynter, Gagan Gupta and Sara Willingham of The Paynter Law Firm PLLC and Abraham Rubert-Schewel of Tin Fulton Walker & Owen PLLC.

Alamance County and affiliated individuals are represented by Christopher J. Geis of Womble Bond Dickinson and Natalia K. Isenberg of Teague Campbell Dennis & Gorham LLP.

The case is North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v. Alamance County et al., case number 23-262, in the North Carolina Court of Appeals.