- Hello, I'm David Hurst.

Coming up, our interviews with the 2026 candidates for the North Carolina Supreme Court Associate Justice seat and the North Carolina Court of Appeals seat one.

Next.

- Quality public television is made possible through the financial contributions of viewers like you, who invite you to join them in supporting PBS NC.

♪ - The 2026 Judicial Candidates Forum is made possible by a partnership between PBS North Carolina and the North Carolina Bar Association.

♪ - Joining us now are the nominees for the North Carolina Supreme Court Associate Justice seat, Democratic candidate Anita Earls and Republican candidate Sarah Stevens.

Thank you both for joining us today.

We appreciate it.

- Thank you for having us.

- Thank you.

- Now, this isn't necessarily a debate, just a chance for you to connect with voters, answer some questions.

We did do a coin toss just a minute ago.

Ms.

Earls, you won that coin toss.

You're elected to go second.

So, Ms.

Stevens, I'll put this first question toward you.

- Certainly.

- Beyond writing opinions, what are some of the most important roles, would you say, responsibilities for this role?

- To ensure being a conservative, and that is to listen carefully to both sides, apply the law as it's written, and then ensure that all the constitutional protections have been there.

That's what I did in the North Carolina General Assembly for 17 years.

- And Ms.

Earls, same question to you.

- Yes, well, I've been on the court for seven and a half years, and from my experience, in addition to what we do in the courtroom, hearing cases and deciding the controversies that come before us, as members of the judiciary, we also have administrative roles, and that means everything from proposing changes to the rules of appellate procedure to making sure that both the civil and criminal justice systems are working as best they can.

And so, there are a variety of ways as justices that we can carry out that responsibility, but the code of judicial conduct is very clear that in addition to our adjudicative role, our role in the courtroom, we have administrative responsibilities for the justice system.

- Ms.

Stevens, how would you decide whether a dissent is worth writing or not?

- It would need to be something that was very controversial to me or something that I felt was truly worthy if I felt like the majority opinion were completely wrong or had gone way off script, or if there was one specific special issue that I needed to cover.

That's what I would do.

- And for you, Ms.

Earls, how do you kind of navigate that decision?

- Well, I think, ideally, our court should try to deliberate and come to a decision that incorporates all points of view.

That's why there's seven of us and not just a single justice.

But when I believe that the justices in the majority, whoever they might be, when I believe that they have not either got the law right or are not right about the facts in the case or they haven't applied the law correctly to the facts, then I believe it is my responsibility to write an opinion, a dissenting opinion, that explains my point of view.

- Ms.

Stevens, you alluded to your career in the state legislature.

What would you say, whether it be that or something else, what would you say your experience, what kind of experience do you bring to this role?

- Certainly.

I've been an attorney for 40 years.

I've been a lifelong resident of North Carolina and practiced law in North Carolina.

Then I had the privilege 17 1/2 years ago of going to the North Carolina General Assembly.

I watched the process of how law was made, which is why I'm very clear that the court shouldn't be making the law.

This process of having a legislative body is a critical part of making sure that the law gets right.

Those 170 people have to answer to the voters every two years, whereas as a justice, you only answer every eight years.

So it's not a part of the court to change the law, but to simply follow it as written by the General Assembly unless you find a constitutional issue.

You don't just mess with the law because you can.

So I think that's what's most important.

In my role as a legislator, I chaired the Judiciary Committee.

And that was part of what I did, is look at the law that people were proposing, because some of them are not attorneys, to ensure that that law was clear in how it read, that it met the elements of the Constitution, and then took it before a bipartisan Judiciary Committee in which we debated it and worked on getting things together, worked on what are the unintended consequences, what about other people's perspectives, where I think if you are on the bench and you start to- you know, you're viewing it only from your perspective as opposed to everyone else's.

That's one reason the legislature makes the law and the judiciary just ensures it's followed.

- What about you, Ms.

Earls?

What would you say is the most valuable experience you bring to the Supreme Court?

- Well, prior to being elected in 2018, I was a civil rights attorney for 30 years.

That means I stood with people whose rights were being violated.

I litigated cases in state and federal courts, so I tried cases to juries, but also really significantly for an appellate court.

I argued cases in several federal circuits.

I argued cases in the North Carolina Court of Appeals, in the North Carolina Supreme Court.

So litigation experience is significant.

But I would also say that having a broad-based practice- so, as a civil rights attorney, I handled cases involving a wide range of types of issues.

And I think what I want people to know is that the reason why I wanted to be a civil rights attorney was the experience of growing up in a mixed-race family at a time when my parents' marriage was actually illegal in most of the country.

So I really saw how the law impacts people's lives and how important it is that we live up to that promise that's etched in stone over the U.S.

Supreme Court, the promise of equal justice under the law.

And so I believe that my experience in standing up with citizens and communities across North Carolina to try to guarantee those rights, to try to get us closer to equal justice under the law is very relevant to now serving on the Supreme Court.

- Ms.

Stevens, what would you say are the two most important characteristics for an associate justice?

- The ability to understand and know the law, and have read the Constitution, and the ability and willingness to listen to different opinions.

I think those are the two fundamental factors.

You have to set aside your own preferences, your own advocacy, and listen to both sides to try to reach an opinion, and I think that's important.

I think that's a lot of what I did in the legislature.

I was advocating for people as an attorney, and then in the judiciary, I was able to see what everybody thought would be the best policy for the state of North Carolina, and that's what we moved forward with.

So I think that's the critical part, is being willing to listen to both sides, but also understanding and reviewing the law and the Constitution.

- Same question to you, Ms.

Earls.

I'm sure there's lots of characteristics you could choose from, but what would you say are the two most important?

- So I think having broad experience in the law, because on the courts, we're generalists.

There's very few areas of law that we don't address in one way or another.

We impact people's lives on everything from electricity rates to whether if someone's injured on the job, they'll get fairly compensated, just a wide range of types of law.

So I think having a broad-based experience is helpful once you're on the court, so that's one quality.

And I think a second quality is being able to understand different points of view and listen carefully and be willing to entertain the views of people who might think differently from you or from, you know, often there's multiple sides in a case, maybe not just two.

And so being able to understand all of the arguments that might be made in a case and come to a resolution that's really the best for all the people of North Carolina.

- And Ms.

Stevens, a little bit of a lighter question here.

Who would you say are some of your judicial heroes?

- Wow, wow.

Again, on state level, Justice Newby.

I think he's an incredible conservative who's done a tremendous job for the state of North Carolina.

On the federal level, believe it or not, I think one of my preferences is John Roberts.

A lot of people view John Roberts as controversial when he went on the court.

They didn't agree with some of his opinions.

But as I watched and listened to him, I listened to him follow the Constitution.

It might not have gotten the results that some people wanted, but he did, even in the case of Ray versus Wade, it belongs to the state, not to the federal government.

So it's trying to get and stay in those lanes.

That's what we need to do.

I mean, I have a broad base of experience, too.

I've done multiple things.

I wound up settling into family law, but I did lots of things and I've been on appeal.

Didn't make it to the Supreme Court because we settled before it got there.

But I think that we need justices who are conservative and who will follow the law and not get in there and play politics.

- What about you, Ms.

Earls?

Maybe judicial heroes that you look up to or inspire you.

- So on the U.S.

Supreme Court, I would start with Thurgood Marshall, but I'm also, I was very influenced by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

And Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson and I were both on the short list at the same time, and I think the president made an absolute wise decision.

It is wonderful to my, for me, to see the role that she's had on the U.S.

Supreme Court.

So those are some of my idols, I would say.

- So we've got about two minutes or so left.

I want to give each of you a chance, a minute or so, just of closing arguments, you would say.

Just a message to the voters, anything you might want to close with.

Ms.

Stevens, I'll start with you.

- Thank you, thank you.

And in my experience, both in the law practice, it's one thing, and the legislature, something different.

I have been a constitutional conservative.

I've been a law and order person.

Despite misleading advertisements that are out there, I have strongly advocated for children in all realms and features.

I have received awards from the Conference of District Attorney and the Sheriff's Association because I am such a law and order person.

Worked with those every year.

I'm a mother, a grandmother, and I'm a straight shooter.

- Ms.

Earls?

- Yes, well, thank you.

I want to thank PBS and the Bar Association for giving us this opportunity to come and speak to your viewers and to voters.

What I want people to know is that I am not beholden to any particular political ideology.

My goal has always been to make sure that we protect everyone's rights under the state and federal constitutions, and that we guarantee equal justice under the law for all the citizens of North Carolina.

And that's why I'm running to keep my seat.

I want to try to be a part of making sure that we enforce the Constitution and protect people's rights.

- Well, we've got still about another minute or so, so I'll each give you about 30 seconds.

I want to, Ms.

Stevens, hear from you just in terms of what maybe might be most important that North Carolinians know about this role and maybe some misunderstanding of what it does.

But what would you say overall is the most important thing about this role that you'd like people to understand?

- It deals with some of the most complicated issues, and it needs serious looking after.

It needs a non-political animal, and in essence, that's sort of what I have been.

I haven't held a fundraiser to raise money to build a Republican infrastructure.

I have stood independently, and that's what I will continue to do, is be that constitutional conservative who follows the law.

- Ms.

Earls, we'll give you the final word.

You've got about 30 seconds.

- Yes, well, our courts have impacted everything, as I said earlier, about electricity rates, not only that, but what kind of funding our public schools might have, how our democracy is structured, whether people's votes will count and count equally, how the balance of power between the three branches of state government, all of those are issues that our court decides, and my record is clear.

I have seven and a half years on the bench and opinions that our public and people can see, and I just hope that people understand how important our Supreme Court races are and that we hear everyone's voice in November through their vote.

- Well, thank you both for joining us.

We appreciate it.

- Thank you so much for bringing us in.

- Thank you.

- In-person early voting in North Carolina begins October 15th and ends October 31st.

Election day is Tuesday, November 3rd.

♪ - Joining us now are the candidates for North Carolina Court of Appeal seat one, Democratic candidate John Arrowood and Republican candidate Michael Byrne.

Thank you both for being here today.

We appreciate it.

- Thank you.

- Thank you for having me.

- Mr.

Byrne, you won the coin toss.

You decided to defer to the second question, so Mr.

Arrowood, we'll start with you.

What do you say you see as the role of the Court of Appeals?

- Well, having been the incumbent at the Court of Appeals for the past 10 years, what I see as the role of the court is we're an error-correcting court, and the issue is did the trial court err in doing X, Y, or Z in any particular case?

And our job is to see and to apply the law equally and without favor to see if, in fact, the trial court erred and to apply the precedence that we have.

- Mr.

Byrne, same question for you.

What do you see as the role of the court?

- Well, the Court of Appeals does two things.

They review rulings from administrative law judges like me, superior court judges, and district court judges to make sure that we got the law right, as Judge Arrowood used the phrase "error-correcting court," and I think that's fairly accurate.

They make sure that lower court judges don't commit legal error.

The second thing they do I think is equally important is that they review findings of fact to determine whether those facts are supported by the evidence.

That's something particularly important to me because in my job, I'm both fact finder and law finder, so it's equally important when a decision comes up that you can ascertain whether the facts the lower court judge finds are adequately supported by the evidence.

So they do those two things in my view.

- Mr.

Arrowood, what would you say are the two most important qualities for a judge on the Court of Appeals?

- Experience and integrity.

I just think that it's important that you have folks who have real-life experience.

Like I clerked at the court, was a staff attorney, the head of the staff for 25 years.

I was a commercial litigator in Charlotte.

I then was a superior court judge and have been at the Court of Appeals for about 10 years.

So I think experience is really what one needs to have in order to be able to fairly and without favor express the law and do what you need to do to make sure that equal justice is done.

And I think integrity is something that every judge should have and what every citizen should look at in determining whether the judges are fair and impartial.

- Same question to you, Mr.

Byrne, two most important qualities you would say?

- Well, in terms of experience, I think we have to look at a couple of things.

One is what the judge has done and what that judge would bring to the court as it's currently constituted.

In my case, I've been a state administrative law judge for six years.

One of the issues with the Court of Appeals, quite candidly, is getting opinions out.

There's an old saying, justice delayed is justice denied.

And as someone who represented state employees and police for years, waiting on decisions from various courts, that's something I have personal experience with.

As administrative law judge in six years, I've issued over 400 decisions.

All right, something equally important, getting the law right.

10 of those decisions were reviewed by the Court of Appeals.

All 10 were unanimously affirmed.

So I've never been reversed for legal error.

Basically, getting the law right is critical, getting the work out is critical.

And then finally, applying the law without fear or favor.

A judge who applies a partisan bent to a decision is a judge who, in my view, should not be on the bench.

In my job, I hear cases involving agencies that are controlled by Democrats and controlled by Republicans.

And the difference in the way I treat them is nothing, because there's not a Democratic or Republican law, there's just the law.

And the judge is required to apply that accurately, fairly, and without fear or favor.

- Mr.

Arrowwood, what would you say is it about your experience that is most valuable to the Court of Appeals?

- I think what's most valuable to the Court of Appeals is that I've been there for 10 years doing the job, and that I came there with experience, having been a law clerk there, having served on the staff, been a staff attorney there.

And so I know what the court was like, and I believe that I'm able to do the job fairly, equitably, and efficiently, because I would agree that it's important that we have fair decisions and that we have them quickly.

And there are 15 judges on our court.

Two-thirds of them haven't been there for a full term, and a full quarter of them haven't been there for five years.

And I believe that my experience, and you can read my opinions and determine what kind of a judge I am, and so I think that my experience at the court is totally worth keeping.

- What about you, Mr.

Byrne?

What is it about your experience that would be most valuable to the court?

- Well, first, my experience at the Court of Appeals goes back to the 1990s.

That's when I first started arguing cases there.

I was very fortunate to be able to argue personally more than 20 cases in the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, was an amicus, a friend of the court, and many others, for groups like National Associates of Police Organizations, North Carolina Police Benevolent Association, North Carolina Fraternal Order of Police.

Just parenthetically, I'm the only judicial candidate in this race of either party who is endorsed by those three law enforcement organizations.

But in my case, it's not uncommon for people to have expertise on the appellate level.

In my case, I think I bring a unique diversity of perspective in that I have decades of experience in administrative law.

Administrative law affects every man, woman, and child in this state.

It's very complex.

When a river is polluted, that's administrative law.

When there is deciding who's gonna own or operate a new hospital, that's administrative law.

When making sure teachers and state employees are treated fairly, that's administrative law.

And I've worked on literally thousands.

When you add that I did 270-plus cases as a lawyer there, plus foreign decisions, you were nearly at 1,000 cases where I was applying and working and litigating a very complex but very critical area of law.

So I think that is something I bring to the court of appeals or would bring that is relatively unique and that is very much needed.

- Mr.

Arrowood, what I wanna ask you about what or who's inspired you, who are some of your judicial heroes?

-Well, the judge I clerked for is obviously someone who inspired me, which is Judge Gerald Arnold.

I believe that Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a fabulous Supreme Court justice.

I'm impressed and was impressed with Chief Justice Sarah Parker when she was at the North Carolina Supreme Court.

And not only was I impressed with her abilities to write and her ability to decide cases, but also her ability and her willingness to go out and talk to people and be wherever the folks were.

So all of those qualities are things that I believe are people who I admire and qualities that I try to emulate.

-What about you?

Who, living or past, inspires you?

Who are some of your judicial heroes?

-Well, there are two.

The first is Judge Julian Mann III.

He is an icon of the administrative law world.

He was in charge of our office for 32 years.

He hired me.

He transformed our office into one of the best administrative law panels in the country.

And I got my judicial philosophy from him.

He sat me down when I started, and he looked at me, and he said, "Michael, get the law right."

So he's responsible for that.

The other is, you know, people talk about U.S.

Supreme Court judges and justices.

I'm a North Carolina judge and a North Carolina lawyer.

And my hero is a gentleman named Samuel Ash.

Samuel Ash was on our North Carolina Supreme Court.

And in 1787, he decided a case called Baird v. Singleton.

Very quickly, in 1785, the General Assembly passed a law that denied the right of jury trial to people who had their property forfeited for being loyal to King George III during the Revolutionary War.

And somebody sued to recover their property, and Judge Ash wrote the first opinion in the United States, doing what we call judicial review, looking at a law and finding it unconstitutional.

Our Constitution now and then guarantees the right to jury trial.

And Judge Ash looked at that law and said, "This law denies the right to jury trial, and it simply cannot stand as it conflicts with the Constitution."

Now, what's cool about that is two things.

One, that had never been done before.

That was years before the Supreme Court of the United States did it for the first time in 1803 in Marbury v. Madison.

The second thing is the courage that took.

Can you think of a more unpopular group of people in 1787 than people who were loyal to King George?

But he didn't care.

He said, "Those constitutional rights apply to everyone, and they will be enforced," and I think that's a very courageous act, so he is my judicial hero.

- We've got about two minutes or so left, and this obviously isn't a debate, more of an opportunity for you to connect with potential voters.

So, Mr.

Arrowood, I want to give you about a minute.

I'm going to do the same with you, but a minute of sort of closing arguments, things you want to close with that you would like to tell the potential voters.

- Well, thank you for this opportunity, and I would appreciate the folks' vote on November the 3rd.

I believe that my experience, both real life and on the court as a Superior Court judge, as Court of Appeals judge, makes me uniquely qualified for this job, and I would appreciate all consideration, and folks can learn more about me at KeepJudgeArrowood.com.

- Mr.

Byrne, you've got about a minute or so left.

If you'd like to close us out, we'll give you the final word.

- Very good.

For 25 years, I represented ordinary working North Carolinian state employees and police to people who make our state work and who keep our families safe.

I don't represent rich people or big corporations.

I represent regular folks.

In my job as a judge, I've tried to reflect that in that everybody needs to be treated fairly.

Their case needs to be decided as rapidly as possible.

They need to be heard, and they need to be listened to.

I bring, again, a unique combination of over 30 years of appellate, trial, and judicial experience to this job, and I would be honored to receive the vote of our fellow citizens, and I'm grateful for the chance to talk to you and to them today.

- Well, thank you both for coming down here to the studio and chatting with us today.

We appreciate your time, and best of luck with the rest of the campaign.

Thank you both.

- Thank you.

- Thank you.

[upbeat orchestral music] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ - The 2026 Judicial Candidates Forum is made possible by a partnership between PBS North Carolina and the North Carolina Bar Association.

♪ - Quality public television is made possible through the financial contributions of viewers like you, who invite you to join them in supporting PBS NC.