News and Commentary

RALEIGH (April 2, 2026) – The North Carolina Justice Center forcefully condemns the North Carolina Supreme Court’s decision today to overturn its own landmark decision in Leandro IV from November 2022. Today’s decision denies students their constitutional right to a sound, basic education and will worsen educational outcomes.

There have been no legal developments to justify overturning this decision. Meanwhile, students’ needs have only grown due to teacher shortages, impacts of the pandemic, and ongoing budget austerity. The court’s decision to overturn Leandro IV is not only procedurally inappropriate, but it also irreparably harms the integrity and standing of our state’s judicial system, public schools, and early childhood education systems.

“Today’s decision to overturn Leandro IV is part of a state-level pattern of obstructing educational rights and denying schools the resources needed to uphold the constitutional right to sound basic educational opportunities for our state’s children,” said Dana Mangum, Interim Executive Director of the North Carolina Justice Center.

This dismantling of students’ educational rights has been accelerated by the state’s inadequate investments in public education and the diversion of billions of dollars in scarce educational resources to private school vouchers that overwhelmingly benefit wealthy families whose children already attend private schools.

While the state legislature—and now the North Carolina Supreme Court—continue to refuse to provide the constitutionally required resources to our schools and students, it remains clear that the educational investments and policies outlined in the 2020 Leandro Comprehensive Remedial Plan are desperately needed.

“Following decades of underinvestment, the impact of the pandemic and natural disasters on education, and growing mental health needs, school districts across NC are experiencing extraordinary challenges,” said Matt Ellinwood, Education and Law Project Director at the North Carolina Justice Center. “Our schools and early childhood programs are grappling with teacher and staffing shortages while facing threats of funding cuts. With an education system that is truly in jeopardy, our children cannot wait any longer for access to basic educational resources.”

Nothing in this ruling changes the fact that our students have a constitutional right to a sound, basic education. The Leandro Comprehensive Remedial Plan is the only policy that upholds our children’s fundamental right to adequately funded public schools and ensures they have the educational opportunities they deserve. In the wake of this harmful court ruling, the NC Justice Center urges our state legislature to change course and work to fulfill its constitutional mandate to provide the necessary resources to implement the Leandro Comprehensive Remedial Plan.

###

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: Matt Ellinwood, Education and Law Project Director at the North Carolina Justice Center, matt@ncjustice.org

News and Commentary

April is Second Chance Month, a time dedicated to recognizing the collateral consequences of a criminal record and advancing efforts that promote fairness and access to opportunity for people who have been directly impacted by the criminal legal system.

The Fair Chance Criminal Justice Project continues to actively advocating for Second Chance bills that address crucial issues like food access, affordable housing, driver’s license restoration, and the unregulated use of mugshots.

News and Commentary

RALEIGH (March 23, 2026) – The North Carolina Justice Center, together with co-counsel Higgins Benjamin, PLLC, obtained final approval last week for a $305,000 settlement benefitting 99 agricultural workers who came to the United States from Mexico through the H-2A visa program. The farmworkers worked for Lee and Sons Farms in Four Oaks, North Carolina.

The two named plaintiffs—Mr. Lopez Lopez and Mr. Flores Lozano—brought their lawsuit as a class action, alleging that Lee and Sons paid them and their co-workers less than the hourly wage promised in the H-2A job contract, violating state and federal wage and hour laws. They also alleged that the farm did not properly reimburse them for inbound travel expenses, resulting in additional wage violations.

“We are so happy to have reached this result for our clients and all the class members. The wage violations and H-2A contract violations they experienced are, unfortunately, not unique,” said Clermont Ripley, Director of the Workers’ Rights Project at the North Carolina Justice Center. “The willingness of Mr. Lopez Lopez and Mr. Flores Lozano to bravely challenge their employers’ behavior and patiently stick out this litigation in order to get relief for their coworkers and not just themselves is inspiring.”

The settlement provides for payment to compensate class members and the named plaintiffs for the wage and contract violations. In addition, U.S. District Court Judge Terrence Boyle approved consent decrees ordering Lee and Sons to:

  • Ensure its H-2A workers can use the kitchen to prepare their own food
  • Reimburse the H-2A workers for transportation, visa, and subsistence costs with their first paycheck
  • Keep more accurate payroll records to make sure that workers are paid properly for all hours worked

If Lee and Sons uses a labor contractor instead of directly employing H-2A workers, they will require the contractor to comply with these provisions.

Mr. Flores Lozano and Mr. Lopez Lopez are also pleased with this result. “I just want to remind all workers that they have rights and not to be afraid to call [legal] helplines,” said Mr. Flores Lozano. Co-counsel Jon Wall added “Farmers are integral to our North Carolina communities and heritage. We hope this outcome will prompt all farmers to pay close attention to and heed the requirements of the H-2A program.

###

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: Clermont Ripley, Director of the Workers’ Rights Project, clermont@ncjustice.org

El Centro de Justicia de Carolina del Norte obtiene un acuerdo por robo salarial de $305.000 dólares para trabajadores agrícolas con visa H-2A

RALEIGH (March 23, 2026) – El Centro de Justicia de Carolina del Norte, en conjunto con los abogados de Higgins Benjamin, PLLC, obtuvo la semana pasada la aprobación final para un acuerdo de $305.000 dólares que beneficia a 99 trabajadores agrícolas que llegaron a Estados Unidos desde México a través del programa de visas H-2A. Los trabajadores agrícolas trabajaban para Lee and Sons Farms en Four Oaks, Carolina del Norte.

Los dos demandantes nombrados—el Sr. López López y el Sr. Flores Lozano—presentaron su demanda como una acción colectiva, alegando que Lee and Sons les pagó a ellos y a sus compañeros menos del salario por hora prometido en el contrato laboral H-2A, violando las leyes estatales y federales de salarios y horas. También alegaron que la granja no les reembolsó adecuadamente los gastos de viaje de llegada, lo que resultó en violaciones salariales adicionales.

“Estamos muy contentos de haber alcanzado este resultado para nuestros clientes y para todos los miembros de la clase. Las violaciones salariales y las infracciones del contrato H-2A que experimentaron, lamentablemente, no son únicas”, dijo Clermont Ripley, directora del Proyecto de Derechos de los Trabajadores en el Centro de Justicia de Carolina del Norte. “La disposición del señor López López y del Sr. Flores Lozano a desafiar valientemente el comportamiento de sus empleadores y a sostener pacientemente este litigio para conseguir alivio para sus compañeros, y no solo para ellos mismos, es inspiradora.”

El acuerdo establece el pago para compensar a los miembros de la clase y a los demandantes nombrados por las violaciones salariales y contractuales. Además, el juez del Tribunal de Distrito de EE. UU. Terrence Boyle, aprobó decretos de consentimiento que ordenan a Lee and Sons:

  • Garantizar que sus trabajadores H-2A puedan usar la cocina para preparar su propia comida
  • Reembolsar a los trabajadores H-2A los gastos de transporte, visa y subsistencia con su primer sueldo
  • Mantener registros de nómina más precisos para asegurarse de que los trabajadores sean pagados correctamente por todas las horas trabajadas

Si Lee and Sons utiliza un contratista laboral en lugar de emplear directamente a trabajadores H-2A, exigirá que el contratista cumpla con estas disposiciones.

El Sr. Flores Lozano y el Sr. López López también están satisfechos con este resultado. “Solo quiero recordar a todos los trabajadores que tienen derechos y que no teman maracar a las líneas de ayuda [legal]”, dijo el señor Flores Lozano. El coabogado Jon Wall añadió: “Los agricultores son parte integral de nuestras comunidades y herencia de Carolina del Norte. Esperamos que este resultado motive a todos los agricultores a prestar mucha atención y a cumplir con los requisitos del programa H-2A.”

###

PARA MÁS INFORMACIÓN, CONTACTE A: Clermont Ripley, Directora del Proyecto de Derechos de los Trabajadores, clermont@ncjustice.org

News and Commentary

Economic fairness and racial equity are on the line.

North Carolina is advancing the I-77 South Express Lanes project in Charlotte. This is a state highway expansion project that would elevate and widen a large section of I-77 South, adding toll lanes, with a projected cost of $4.3 billion. As a public-private partnership, it would allow a private operator to set dynamic toll prices.

Project maps from the NC Department of Transportation show the proposed project will take hundreds of parcels, displace dozens of homes and businesses—primarily in Black neighborhoods—and leave hundreds more households beside a wider or towering elevated interstate carrying more traffic, more noise, and more pollution.

Community members are urging decision-makers to pause the procurement timeline before the next major step so the public can see a transparent analysis of who pays, who benefits, and what alternatives exist.

Why this matters:

Economic unfairness

  • Toll lanes can make mobility pay-to-play, where those who can afford tolls get faster, more reliable trips, while everyone else gets slower, less reliable travel.
  • Billions in highway expansion can crowd out investments that help more people. It’s important to consider alternatives like transit, safe walking, and reliable buses.

Racial equity

  • Highway expansions have historically harmed Black communities through displacement, neighborhood division, and long-term economic damage.
  • Many are concerned this project risks repeating those harms in historically Black neighborhoods, and that impacts and alternatives have not been fully and transparently evaluated.

What people are asking for:

Pause procurement long enough to ensure:

  • A rigorous, public alternatives analysis (including multimodal options)
  • Updated, specific information on impacts (housing, businesses, community sites)
  • Meaningful public engagement before decisions become hard to reverse

Take action
Sign the petition here.

News and Commentary

The North Carolina Justice Center, represented by the Southern Environmental Law Center, was one of multiple groups to reach a settlement agreement with monopoly utility Duke Energy in its request to the North Carolina Utilities Commission to combine its Carolinas and Progress subsidiaries.

“We will be vigilant to ensure that the promised cost tracking results in actual savings for NC ratepayers and will continue to push Duke Energy, in light of its record profits, to make energy more affordable, particularly for those households that are already struggling to pay their current energy bills,” – Claire Williamson, senior energy policy advocate,  North Carolina Justice Center.

If the agreement is approved by the commission, the proposed merger will improve energy affordability for North Carolina residents, help put downward pressure on energy bills, and provide more reliability.

Read the full press release here

News and Commentary

For decades, the North Carolina General Assembly has stalled on its constitutional duty to provide a sound, basic education for every student, as required by the Leandro ruling. On Feb. 18, after two years with no progress, the NC Justice Center joined Every Child NC coalition partners at the NCGA to urge NC lawmakers to fully fund public education.

Read the Every Child NC press release.

Read news coverage:

Parents, educators ask for NC Supreme Court ruling over multi-billion Leandro lawsuit plan

Leandro case: Activists in Raleigh push for answer, funding

News and Commentary

By Payton Belvin and Laura Webb, with contributions from the NC Justice Center’s Education & Law team

View the PDF report.

Across North Carolina, people do not qualify for food assistance because of a past drug conviction.

The consequences of denying access to SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) extend far beyond the re-entering individuals. When parents are denied access to food assistance, new research shows the effects are felt throughout their households— shaping children’s emotional wellbeing, academic success, and long-term stability.

In 2025, the North Carolina Justice Center partnered with Payton Belvin, a Master of Public Policy (MPP) student studying at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC), to conduct a preliminary qualitative study on the North Carolina Felony SNAP Ban’s impact on children and families.

The research emphasizes a powerful truth—the consequences of the SNAP ban extend far beyond individuals with a felony conviction. When parents are denied access to food assistance, the effects are felt through their households, especially for their children. It shapes children’s emotional life, academic performance, and long-term economic stability.

Living with a family member who is denied SNAP increases children’s vulnerability and chance of entering the “school-to-prison pipeline.”

An Inhumane Policy That Worsens Hunger and Poverty

SNAP is one of the most effective tools for reducing hunger and poverty, lifting hundreds of thousands of North Carolinians, especially children, above the poverty line. A 1996 federal law instituted a ban on SNAP benefits for people with felony drug convictions, a harmful policy rooted in the failed “War on Drugs.” While many states have since fully opted out of this punitive federal ban, North Carolina remains one of the few states that still enforces it.

In 1997, NC adopted a partial opt-out. Individuals with Class H or I felony drug convictions can regain access to SNAP benefits after six months, if they meet special requirements including drug treatment. Those with Class A through G felony drug convictions or out-of-state felony drug convictions—face a lifetime SNAP ban.

These overly punitive exclusions deny food assistance to individuals who already face significant economic barriers. A felony conviction often means an extremely elevated rate of food insecurity (91% of recently released people are food insecure) driven by unpredictable employment. Denying individuals, children, and families eligibility for SNAP food benefits only deepens incredible hardship for marginalized individuals and their families.

Research shows that denying people food assistance increases hunger, worsens health outcomes, and undermines successful reentry. Payton Belvin’s MPP research reinforces this evidence and highlights the profound and lasting harm that the felony SNAP ban inflicts on the educational outcomes, behavior, and long-term well being for children.

How the Felony SNAP Ban Harms Families

Working with non-profit organizations, Belvin recruited and interviewed 21 participants for MPP study. She collected responses from 14 individuals who were denied SNAP because of a felony drug conviction, five adults who were between the ages of 5 and 17 living with a parent who was impacted by the felony SNAP ban, and two policy advocates.

Therefore, the report’s findings draw primarily from impacted individuals who were excluded from SNAP or who were children in excluded households. Responses from policy advocates are incorporated to provide additional context to the themes identified by directly impacted participants.

Read the Full Report

Belvin’s study revealed the following themes:

1. Families experience chronic food insecurity.
More than 90% of directly impacted parents interviewed shared that they frequently run out of food. Every former child participant, who grew up with at least one disqualified parent, also reported that their family frequently runs out of food.

Parents describe feeling helpless as they struggle to feed their children. Despite meeting the SNAP program’s income eligibility, their felony drug conviction disqualifies them from from receiving assistance. 

2. Families rely on unsustainable alternatives to get by.

Without access to SNAP benefits, most families visited overburdened food banks, obtained food from friends or relatives, or skipped meals. Many interviewed parents often sacrificed their own meals so their children could eat. Participants described these alternatives as “unsustainable” and “unreliable,” emphasizing that these options cannot replace the stability and purchasing power of SNAP benefits.

3. The SNAP ban directly harms children’s academic and emotional wellbeing.

The research also identifies  the impact on children’s academic and emotional wellbeing. Parents denied SNAP and their children consistently report increased anxiety, stress, difficulty concentrating in school, social withdrawal, depressive symptoms, and trouble sleeping. Parents and former household members consistently report anxiety, stress, difficulty concentrating, social withdrawal, depressive symptoms, and trouble sleeping.

“My kids seem more anxious and stressed, especially when they’re hungry. My youngest has trouble sleeping because they’re worried about our situation.”

More than 70 percent of SNAP excluded parents said their children struggled academically during periods without SNAP, and every participant who grew up in an excluded household said food insecurity negatively affected their long-term educational and behavioral outcomes.

“I always get upset due to hunger… Since I couldn’t concentrate most [of the] time at school due to hunger, I [lost] passion for schooling.”

4. Food insecurity increases risks of entering the school-to-prison pipeline.

Among participants who were children during periods of SNAP exclusion, 80% reported they or their siblings faced disciplinary action during disqualification. Many also described feeling isolated or ashamed at school.

When hunger drives behavioral changes in the classroom, children are at greater risk of being pushed into the carceral system through the “school-to-prison pipeline.”

Take Action Now to Reduce Harm to Food-Insecure Families

The NC Justice Center calls on the NC General Assembly to opt out of the felony drug SNAP ban. No child should go hungry because of a parent’s past felony drug conviction. Ending the felony SNAP ban is an evidence-based policy change which would align North Carolina with the majority of states who decided to opt-out of the ban.

Opting out of the unfair and discriminatory federal SNAP ban would promote successful reentry, increase employment rates, lower poverty and food insecurity, reduce overdose rates, and ensure that children receive adequate nourishment.

Build awareness on social media

Help us change the narrative on food access.

Watch the SNAP Ban Documentary

If you can, host a documentary screening.

Support community food resources
Donate and volunteer with local food banks and organizations to help people navigating hunger.

Contact your state legislators

Request they support full repeal of North Carolina’s felony SNAP ban [action alert]

Join the statewide campaign

Get connected with the movement to improve food access for individuals and their families across North Carolina.

News and Commentary

Opinion: A child of immigrants, no longer alone in fear

Growing up as the daughter of undocumented Latino immigrants, Andressia Ramirez knew fear and uncertainty. Now, she’s found hope in her hometown of Wilson, N.C.

“What’s giving you hope?”

It’s a question I had come to dread. It comes up constantly in advocacy spaces these days, including all around North Carolina. I always find an answer, but the truth is, I hadn’t really felt hopeful in a long time — until recently.

The last year has been emotionally shattering. Undocumented people have always lived with fear, rooted in lacking a piece of paper that dictates whether your life is considered valid or disposable. Now, federal agents are stopping people for how they look, not what they’ve done. We’re seeing U.S. citizens killed by federal immigration agents. People are starting to understand that no one is safe. Entire communities are canceling medical appointments. Parents are not taking their children to school. People are skipping work, not because they want to, but because survival requires caution. Fear has become a daily calculation.

I know this feeling intimately. And not just from this year.

My parents immigrated from Querétaro, Mexico, and settled in Wilson County, N.C, when I was 8 years old. I remember learning in elementary school that my mother was undocumented. From that moment on, it became our biggest secret. I couldn’t tell anyone because anyone knowing could be a threat. My brothers and I grew up understanding that our mother could be taken from us with no warning.

We learned how to listen carefully, how to stay quiet, how to carry fear without letting it show.

For most of my life, I held onto one hope: that one day my mom would become a citizen. In high school, I felt an overwhelming need be the absolute best student, so that one day I could petition for her. She obtained her green card the year I graduated from college in 2019 and became a citizen in 2025.

Read the full post on Beacon Media.

Andressia Ramirez in an engagement coordinator with our Workers’ Rights Project.

News and Commentary

Last year, President Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” Act created a new federal school voucher program to advance his agenda of dismantling public schools. The program, which is set to begin in 2027, will allow wealthy taxpayers to receive tax credits of up to $1,700 per year by donating to scholarship granting organizations (SGOs) that pass out school vouchers.  

To be eligible to receive a voucher, families must meet the program’s income requirements, which vary based on geography. In Raleigh, families earning up to $400,000 per year would be eligible to receive these vouchers for private school tuition and other vaguely-defined educational expenses.  

Fortunately, states aren’t forced to participate in this program. States must opt into the program. Governors from Oregon, Wisconsin, and New Mexico have stated that their states will not participate. 

Unfortunately, Governor Stein has expressed an openness to participating. In vetoing the General Assembly’s efforts to force North Carolina into participating in this program, Stein emphasized his hope that the Trump administration might allow the program to be used to benefit public school students: “I see opportunities for the federal scholarship donation tax credit program to benefit North Carolina’s public school kids. Once the federal government issues sound guidance, I intend to opt North Carolina in so we can invest in the public school students most in need of after school programs, tutoring, and other resources.” 

“Sound guidance” allowing public school students to receive vouchers under this program is unlikely to arrive. The Trump administration has shown no interest in supporting public school students. But even if sound guidance does arrive, Stein should still opt North Carolina out of the program. 

There is a misconception that the funds flowing to SGOs would constitute “free money” that could be deployed to help students who need it the most. That argument ignores the many costs that accompany participation in the federal voucher scheme. 

First, the state would need to provide oversight of SGOs to minimize the fraud and abuse endemic to voucher programs. Currently, North Carolina spends $18.6 million to administer and oversee its two voucher programs. Even with this high level of administrative spending, there’s little financial oversight. There have been at least 43 instances where private schools received more vouchers than they had self-reported students, an indication that some private schools may be using “ghost students” to defraud taxpayers. Additionally, the state only verifies the incomes of four percent of applicants, leaving the door wide open for families to claim bigger vouchers than they are due. 

Without state oversight, the avenues for fraud under the federal voucher program could be blown wide open. Under the federal program, there would be a network of private, nonprofit SGOs accepting donations and distributing vouchers to North Carolina families. Initial, draft program rules would require the state to approve all eligible SGOs, a low bar that would authorize almost any nonprofit that wants to participate. Participating SGOs are allowed to keep 10 percent of donated funds for “administrative costs,” making participation potentially lucrative. 

Presumably, the “sound guidance” that Governor Stein is seeking would include authority to make sure that these SGOs are in fact providing vouchers to actual students who meet program eligibility requirements, and that funds are used for actual educational expenses. We know from studies of existing voucher programs that, absent state oversight, SGOs could participate in self-dealing and the funding of ghost students, and parents could misspend the funds on purchases unrelated to education. 

Stein must also consider additional voucher-related costs: widening economic inequality, declining academic outcomes, and increasing school segregation.  

Our analysis shows the vast majority of federal voucher funding is awarded to disproportionately wealthy families who have already enrolled their children in private schools. In North Carolina’s largest voucher program, 85 percent of new funding has gone to such families, worsening the divides between wealthy and working-class North Carolinians. 

For families swapping their public school for a private one, the state will have to manage the costs of those children receiving a subpar education. Studies of voucher programs in Washington, DC Indiana, Louisiana, and Ohio found that voucher students perform far worse academically than their peers who remain in traditional, inclusive local public schools. Many of these poorly served students return to the public school system where they then require additional resources to compensate for the inferior education they received in private school. 

Additionally, voucher programs divide students. At a time when our democracy and economy require a renewed dedication to learning how to successfully interact with people from diverse backgrounds, voucher programs entrench division. In North Carolina, 75 percent of voucher students are white, compared to 42 percent of public school students. Students attending less diverse schools are more likely to develop negative views of other racial groups and less likely to live in integrated neighborhoods as adults. 

The costs of a federal voucher program would undoubtedly expand in future years. One hallmark of voucher programs across the country is that they begin on a limited basis and then quickly expand once they gain a foothold. North Carolina’s main voucher program was introduced as a small, $11 million program tightly targeted towards families with low incomes looking to leave public schools. Now, it’s a $655 million program open to millionaires who have already enrolled their children in exclusive private schools. If the Trump administration has its way, the program will likely evolve in ways that are harmful for public school students. 

Alternatively, what happens in future years if the federal government revokes funding for the program? In that scenario, state leaders would face intense pressure to provide state funding so that no student loses their voucher. 

Stein must also consider the political costs of expanding voucher programs. The federal voucher program is the centerpiece of President Trump’s education agenda. Rejecting the program helps throw sand in the gears of an authoritarian and fascistic administration that is openly hostile to public education.  

Opting in, on the other hand, gives the current administration a win, while flying in the face of public opinion. According to a May 2023 poll from the Center for Racial Equity in Education, just 33 percent of North Carolinians support vouchers. Voters have rejected vouchers each of the 17 times states have put vouchers to a referendum, even in deeply red states like Nebraska and Kentucky. Voters correctly recognize that vouchers are just a tool to divide us and put more money into the pockets of the wealthy. 

By unambiguously rejecting the federal voucher program now, Stein can shift the education debate back to where it belongs: securing full funding for the constitutionally mandated Leandro Plan. The tutoring and after school programs that Stein wants would become readily affordable if schools finally receive the 40 percent state funding increase mandated by the Supreme Court. Under Leandro, such programs could be provided for all students, not just those whose parents apply for a voucher.  

News and Commentary

(February 9, 2026—Raleigh, NC) 2026 marks 100 years of celebrating Black History. 100 years of uplifting the profound resilience, joy, and intelligence of Black people, and their unique contributions that have helped shape our country.   

Black history is American history, despite efforts to dilute or erase it. This month serves as a time to honor the past and those who fought for the rights and dignity of Black people, and to celebrate the collective strength, power, brilliance, and creativity Black communities hold today. 

Black History Month initially began as Negro History Week in 1926, organized by Dr. Carter G. Woodson, founding member of the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, to celebrate and commemorate Black life and achievements. As it grew in popularity, the Association began pushing to extend the celebration to a month.  

In February 1975, President Gerald R. Ford became the first president to observe Black History Week, and the following year, became the first President to recognize Black History Month during the U.S. Biennial Celebration. In 1986, Congress passed a public Law designating February as National Black History Month.  

Knowing Black history also means seeing how systemic oppression continues today through federal, state, and local policies that harm the health, education, livelihoods, and freedom of Black individuals, families, and communities. Systemic oppression manifests today in many Black communities in numerous ways—from under-resourced schools, shameful maternal and infant mortality rates, and other inequitable health outcomes—to police violence, unjust treatment by judicial systems, discriminatory employment practices, and other barriers to social and economic mobility.

Despite this adversity, Black people have risen with joy and brilliance. During Black History month—and every month—the NC Justice Center celebrates, amplifies, and stands in solidarity with Black people who continue to advocate, lead, organize, create, build collective power, and drive change in their communities and throughout the world.  

At a time of intensifying threats to the safety and dignity of marginalized communities, the NC Justice Center is committed to dismantling pervasive inequities in housing, education, employment, and health care—and fighting for fairness, well-being, and opportunity for all.