John McCain says he would appoint similar Supreme Court justices as George W. Bush.

Speaking at Wake Forest University today, the putative Republican presidential nominee accused Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama of favoring "activist judges," Bloomberg reports.

McCain praised Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, appointed by Bush, as "jurists of the highest caliber."

His views on the Supreme Court are being carefully watched because McCain was one of a bipartisan group, called the Gang of 14, that steered a middle course on Bush's appointments. The next president may also have an opportunity to make several appointments, with four justices over the age of 70.

In the speech, McCain noted that Obama opposed Roberts' appointment in 2005, saying that the toughest Supreme Court cases "can only be determined on the basis of one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works and the depth and breadth of one's empathy."

McCain said the comments "attempt to justify judicial activism."

Speaking of both Obama and Clinton, he added, "apparently nobody quite fits the bill except for an elite group of activist judges, lawyers and law professors who think they know wisdom when they see it."

Welcome to Bob Orr 101: The Constitution and the Governor's Race 2008. Please have a seat.

Today, we'll be discussing Article V, Section 2(7), of the state Constitution, which says the state may appropriate money to a business only for "public purposes."

In Maready v. Winston Salem in 1996, the Supreme Court found in a 5-2 vote that cash and tax breaks given to 24 companies in Forsyth County met that test because they created jobs and helped the tax base grow.

Orr, then a Supreme Court justice, disagreed, saying the incentives were "corporate welfare."

"If a potential corporate entity is considering a move to Winston-Salem but will only come if country club memberships are provided for its executives, do we sanction the use of tax revenue to facilitate the move?" he wrote.

According to Orr, the recruitment of corporations through incentives only provided minimal job and tax base growth and hurt small communities that can't compete.

He also said the expenditures failed "the ultimate test for determining public purpose" by benefiting special interests as opposed to the public in general.

Bob Orr sometimes seems to be running for the head of the law review.

The Republican gubernatorial candidate is well-known among the press corps for his ability to cite the state constitution on almost any political issue.

Perhaps that's from his time teaching constitutional law or his years on the state Supreme Court or his recent stint as head of the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law.

But it doesn't play well on the campaign trail, and in recent weeks Orr has cut back.

Still, he can't always resist. Orr made it 28 minutes into a 30-minute debate on UNC-TV last week. Then, in response to a question about the state budget, he let it slip.

"The state constitution requires that North Carolina have a balanced budget," he said.

A key test for Orr at tonight's WRAL debate: Can he make it through the debate without mentioning the constitution? Dome will be watching.

A Wake County judge said Thursday that he will make the state give up as much as $768 million.

Superior Court Judge Howard Manning Jr. said that the state should give to schools most of the money collected from civil fines for almost a decade leading up to 2005.

That year, the state Supreme Court ruled that the money wasn't being given to public schools as required by state law and sent the case back to Manning to decide how much should be distributed.

Manning rejected most arguments aimed at limiting the payout.

Under stte law, the money must be used to pay for new technology. (N&O) 

Bob Orr left his heart in Yancey County.

The former Supreme Court justice, who is running for the Republican nomination for governor, has lived in Raleigh since 1986, but he's still registered to vote about 250 miles away.

Under state law, voters can live in one city and register in another as long as they consider it home. Individual decisions have turned on where a voter goes to church, whether they get the local newspaper and where they own a burial plot.

After he joined the state Supreme Court, Orr remained registered in Burnsville, a common practice for elected officials who have to work in the state capital.

Though he owns a house and goes to church in Raleigh, he said he gets the Yancey County paper and checks his answering machine messages there regularly. He hopes to remain registered, but he said he'll register in Raleigh if the State Board of Elections says he should.

"I would only switch to Wake County if they say I need to," he told Dome.

The N.C. Supreme Court ruled today that the legislature must redraw Rep. Thomas Wright's district after 2008.

In Pender County vs. Bartlett, the majority opinion reversed a lower court ruling and held that House District 18 and nearby districts were not properly drawn under the state constitution.

At issue is whether a county should have its own district, or whether legislators can split up counties to create a minority district and satisfy the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965.

In the opinion, Justice Robert Edmunds Jr. noted that the legislature is not scheduled to reconvene until next May and candidates are already planning campaigns, so he postponed the deadline:

To minimize disruption to the ongoing election cycle, the remedy explained above shall be stayed until after the 2008 election.

Chief Justice Sarah Parker and Justice Patricia Timmons-Goodson dissented. Justice Robin Hudson did not participate in the decision.

A moratorium bill didn't get any traction today, but death penalty opponents were still celebrating.

That's because two other bills that did pass the House would help death row inmates, Andrea Weigl reports.

The N.C. Racial Justice Act would allow death row inmates to use statistics to try to prove prosecutors sought the death penalty against them because of their race.

And a proportionality review bill would allow the state Supreme Court to compare their appeals with other cases in which the defendant was given a life sentence.

Currently, when the state Supreme Court reviews death row inmates' appeals, it evaluates whether the sentence was fair in comparison to other cases in which the defendant received death.

But the bill would only allow an expanded review when the defendant was convicted of felony murder, where a killing occurs during another crime. A classic example of felony murder is when a clerk is killed during a convenience store robbery.

A national report on state Supreme Court races praised North Carolina.

The report looked at campaign finances of 2005-06 elections for top state judicial posts. It found that 99 percent of money for North Carolina's candidates came from state residents.

That compares favorably to Georgia, where 50 percent came from out of state.

The report also found that 53 percent of North Carolina's judicial campaign money came either from the public financing or from contributions of less than $100.

The report was done jointly by the Justice at Stake campaign and the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law and the National Institute for Money in State Politics.