Plaintiffs Want Cleta Mitchell to Testify on Law to Suppress Student Voting

Voting rights groups in North Carolina are asking a federal court to compel election-denying lawyer Cleta Mitchell to testify in their challenge to a voter suppression law they say was designed to keep young people from voting.

Democracy North Carolina, the North Carolina Black Alliance and the League of Women Voters of North Carolina filed a motion Thursday asking a judge to authorize “alternative service” of a subpoena on Mitchell — by email and priority mail — after repeated attempts to serve her in person failed.

The 2023 law being challenged, Senate Bill 747 (SB 747), changed rules for same-day voter registration, allowing election officials to throw out a ballot if just one piece of mail sent to verify the voter’s address is returned as undeliverable. Voters are not notified and have no chance to fix the problem.

Before SB 747, two failed mailings were required, and voters had an opportunity to contest a denial. The plaintiffs argue the measure targets young voters, especially college students, who often move frequently or have different mailing and physical addresses. Mitchell’s testimony may support the plaintiffs’ argument that the law was passed with discriminatory intent. 

Mitchell, a longtime GOP election lawyer who worked with President Donald Trump in his attempt to overturn the 2020 election, has been vocal about limiting student voting. 

At an April 2023 retreat for Republican National Committee donors, she urged her party to act in battleground states like North Carolina.

“We need to be looking at, what are these college campus locations and polling, what is this young people effort that [Democrats] do?” Mitchell said, calling on the GOP to restrict student voting access. “They basically put the polling place next to the student dorm, so they just have to roll out of bed, vote, and go back to bed.”

She also singled out Wisconsin as “a big problem” because of polling sites on campuses.

“They’ve registered them in one line, and then they vote them in the second line,” Mitchell said. “Their goal for the Supreme Court race was to turn out 240,000 college students in that Supreme Court race. And we don’t have anything like that, and we need to figure out how to do that, and how to combat that.”

In New Hampshire, Mitchell said she spoke directly with then-Gov. Chris Sununu (R)  about student voting and called for “an active task force to make sure it’s fixed.”

The groups challenging SB 747 say those comments, along with Mitchell’s connections to the North Carolina Election Integrity Team — an affiliate of her Election Integrity Network — show she played a role in pushing restrictions that directly burden student voters.

“Ms. Mitchell is a previously deposed witness and central figure in proving intent in this action,” lawyers representing the plaintiffs wrote in a separate motion. They argued she has been “evading service” of a trial subpoena.

The trial for the case is set to begin Oct. 20. If the court grants the plaintiffs’ motion, Mitchell will be compelled to testify the following day. The outcome of the case could determine whether North Carolina voters retain meaningful access to same-day registration — a process student voters especially rely on.