Super PAC money in Supreme Court race passes $1.3 million

The super PAC formed to re-elect Justice Paul Newby to the state Supreme Court has spent $1.3 million on the intentionally corny “banjo” TV ad promoting the incumbent, newly released records show. And the records provide the first glimpse of who is backing the independent campaign.

The N.C. Judicial Coalition – comprised of key figures in North Carolina conservative politics and a Democratic former chief justice – racked up that amount just between Oct. 11 and Oct. 23, according to reports just filed with the state Board of Elections. Previously, it had only been known that the PAC, known as an independent expenditure committee, had spent more than $800,000 on TV ads.

The committee reported receiving $723,525 through the third quarter of this year. While the disclosures show some of the contributors, the single biggest chunk of money comes from another independent expenditure committee, which has not yet reported its donors. Justice for All N.C., which was formed in May, gave $395,000 to the pro-Newby PAC in October.

Other contributors include: the N.C. Chamber independent expenditure committee, $163,700; R.J. Reynolds, $100,000; Judicial Coalition board chairman and Raleigh businessman Bob Luddy, $25,000; Wilimington business owner Neil Bender II, $25,000. The N.C. Chamber super PAC reports spending an additional $77,000 to promote Newby through its own advertising.

The Judicial Coalition spent $617,590 last week after the third-quarter reporting had concluded. Newby is running against appellate court Judge Sam Ervin IV. Outside groups supporting Ervin have not reported spending anything close to this amount.

Independent expenditure committees, which are also referred to as super PACs, can raise and spend unlimited money to elect or defeat candidates, so long as they do not coordinate with the candidates’ campaigns. The rapid escalation of money in the nonpartisan Supreme Court election over the past couple of weeks prompted a group of 39 lawyers and former judges, predominately Democratic, on Friday to condemn the situation as a threat to the independence of the judiciary and as potentially undermining the public financing of appellate division judicial campaigns.