Your job is changing fast. New tools, new expectations, and real pressure to keep up. This isn't a someday problem. It's happening right now. That's where Code Academy comes in.
Instead of just watching or reading, you learn by doing. From your very first lesson, you're writing real code directly in your browser. No setup, no guesswork. Whether it's AI tools, prompt engineering, data analysis, or cybersecurity, Code Academy shows you exactly what to learn and gives you a clear, step-by-step path to get there.
So you're not just keeping up with tech, you're actually getting ahead. With structured career paths and real-world projects, you'll build skills you can use immediately on the job. Join millions of people already leveling up with Code Academy. Start your free trial today at CodeAcademy.com. It's 5.05 and welcome in to a Tuesday edition of the Carolina Journal News Hour on Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT.
I'm Nick Craig. Good morning to you. We've got some more interesting news out of the North Carolina legislature to kick off the program this morning. For the second time in just three days, a Democrat representative within the North Carolina General Assembly from Mecklenburg County has switched their party affiliation to unaffiliated. This time we're talking about Representative Nassif Masheed.
He is from House District 99 in northern Mecklenburg County, and he announced the switch on Monday, setting a renewed commitment to voters across House District 29, or 99, I should say. In part, he writes in his statement: After deep reflection and conversations with constituents across District 99, I have made the decision to disaffiliate with the Democrat Party and serve as an independent. This decision is rooted in my responsibility to represent people, not party agendas, and to remain grounded with integrity, fairness, and truth. Majid served on the Charlotte City Council from 1991 to 1999 and became a member of the General Assembly back in 2018. He was one of three Democrats to lose in his primary in March of this year when challenger Valerie Levy won 68.
To 26. Similar to what we talked about yesterday with Representative Carla Cunningham in July of 2025, Representative Majeed was the only Democrat in the North Carolina House to side with Republicans to vote on the veto override of House Bill 805, known as preventing the sexual exploitation of women and minors. That vote back in July of 2025 pit him against Democrat leadership in the state of North Carolina. And well, we saw the results of that in the March primary earlier this year. As I mentioned, on Friday, Representative Carla Cunningham of Mecklenburg County also switched to unaffiliated, saying that she could no longer serve the interests within the Democrat Party, but would rather serve her constituents.
Anderson Clayton, the chair of the North Carolina Democrat Party, while not having officially released a statement, took to social media. Friday night after the Cunningham switch, writing, and I quote, don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you, as they say, end quote, there from the chairwoman of the North Carolina Democrat Party. According to the media outlet, the NC Insider Representative Shelly Willingham, who was the third Democrat to lose in the March, the 2020, March 2026 primaries, who represents parts of northeastern North Carolina, also lost his primary in March and was often named alongside Cunningham and Majeed as a swing vote Democrat.
However, he tells NC Insider he will not be switching party, saying in part, from my point of view, no matter what is in front of my name, whether it's a D or an R or a U, it's not going to change me. My philosophy is the same and my style of representation is going to be the same.
So I don't see any reason why I should change anything. Majeed has said that, Representative Majeed, I should say, has said that the switch will allow him to operate without the constraints of political parties, saying in a statement, my focus remains unchanged, delivering results for working families, supporting economic opportunity, addressing public safety, and expanding access to affordable housing. As an independent, I am free to evaluate each of these issues on its merits and advocate without constraint. Similar to Carla Cunningham, he will remain in his seat until the end of the legislative term here in 2026. Both Majid and Cunningham will not be on ballots coming up in November of this year, as both of them were unsuccessful in their Democrat primary back just last month.
This is now the third time that a Democrat from Mecklenburg County, as part of the North Carolina General Assembly, has switched their party affiliation in the last three years. It was Representative Tricia Cotham back in 2020. Representative Carla Cunningham on Friday, and now Representative Nassif Majeed on Monday. We'll keep an eye on all the details. Bring you the latest right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour.
In some other statewide news this morning, Attorney General Jeff Jackson is urging North Carolina businesses impacted by President Donald Trump's first round of tariffs to apply for refunds. With the AG saying in a press release, these tariffs cost North Carolina families and businesses $3.5 billion. That was money people needed for food, gas, and running their businesses. I hope that eligible businesses act now to apply for refunds. The newly announced system is a good first step, but we need a faster process for refunds that doesn't burden businesses.
To streamline the submission and processing of legitimate refund requests for duties imposed under the international Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEPA, as authorized by the court order or applicable law, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol is developing what is called the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries, CAPE, functionality within the Automated Commercial Environment Processing System, according to a press release. CAPE is intended to consolidate refunds of IEPA duties, including interest, rather than processing them on an entry-by-entry basis. This brand new CAPE system will be implemented through a phase development approach, with the first phase launching back just a couple of days ago on April the 20th, with some of the future phases adding functionality for more complex situations according to customs and border protection. The first phase is restricted to specific unliquidated entries and specific entries within 80 days of liquidation.
Brian Balfour, the vice president of research at the John Locke Foundation, said: With the Supreme Court ruling that these businesses were charged tariffs illegally, it makes sense to have them be reimbursed. Such refunds exemplify the fact that the tariffs were a burden on the U.S. and North Carolina businesses and consumers. Better still would be for Congress to find a way to reimburse consumers who had to shoulder a share of that tariff burden, but that would be likely much more complicated. Tariffs by design are implemented to raise prices on certain imported goods in order to protect higher-priced domestic manufacturers from competition.
Unfortunately, in the end, consumers pay more. End quote there from Brian Balfour. According to a recent report from the John Locke Foundation, how tariffs threaten North Carolina's agriculture, economic losses in the state could exceed $1.9 billion or potentially up to 2% of the state's GDP. With almost $700 million of that coming from agriculture, the state's number one industry. Additionally, these economic losses could impact some 8,000 jobs across the state of North Carolina.
Going back to some of the commentary from Attorney General Jeff Jackson, he says these tariffs were illegally imposed on imported goods, resulting in an estimated $166 billion being paid by over 330,000 American businesses and individuals on over 53 million shipments. We propose that Congress enact legislation that would require the administration to provide a timely refund with interest of all duties wrongfully levied under IEPA. Eligible importers or brokers requesting refunds must submit through the CAPE system and a declaration listing the entities for which they are requesting refunds on that back-end data portal. Provided by the federal government. Refunds, including interest, will be issued within 60 to 90 days of the declaration's acceptance.
And if additional review is needed, rather, some of those refunds may take longer to issue. Refunds are reading directly from the letter. It says refunds should be processed regardless of entry type or liquidation status, leveraging existing data to calculate, manage, and automate the process, writes the letter that Jeff Jackson was signed onto. That portal already has the information and tools needed to return the exact amount of illegally collected funds from each importer to the government, according to officials. Congress is also urged to consider ways to offset some of the financial impact of tariffs on consumers, who, of course, will not be eligible for any additional payments.
On March the 5th, back a little over a month and a half ago, Jackson and a group of AGs filed a lawsuit to block the latest round of federal tariffs implemented on the same day as the sweeping AIPA tariffs were struck down by the United States Supreme Court. That lawsuit still slowly matriculating through the federal justice system right now. We'll keep an eye on the power. On those details. You can read more on this letter from Attorney General Jeff Jackson.
Those details over on our website this morning. CarolinaJournal.com with the headline: AG Jackson urges NC businesses to apply for tariff refunds. Mm-hmm. WBT's News and Brews is back for 2026. Join the WBT Air Team Tuesday, May the 12th at Heist Brewery and Barrel Arts for a night of fun conversation about everything happening across the state of North Carolina, Charlotte, Washington, D.C., and the world.
It's WBT's News and Brews. Visit WBT.com this morning for tickets and event details. Looking forward to seeing everybody Tuesday, May the 12th at Heist Brewery and Barrel Arts. It's now 5:20. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT.
I'm Nick Craig. Good morning to you. There's been an interesting national discussion over the last couple of years about financial literacy. This has become a major topic of discussion, especially as many folks, unfortunately, children or young adults, are graduating the public school system and arguably have very little financial literacy skills when they move on to either a two, four-year school, maybe go into the trades. And it's sparking a major debate across the state of North Carolina.
We've got some pretty cool news this morning out of the North Carolina Treasurer's Office as it relates to financial literacy. To walk us through some of those details, Teresa Opaca, CarolinaJournal.com, joins us on the news hour. Teresa, I don't think any of our audience should be surprised that the state treasurer, of all people, has got a vested interest in financial literacy. What do you learn from Treasurer Brad Briner's office? Sure.
Good morning, Nick. Thanks for having me. Yeah, I mean, even from out of the gate last year when he first took over in the office, he's. Been all about financial literacy, and this year is no different. He announced recently the creation of an internship program within his.
Office that's going to give high school students an opportunity to work with them and also promoting financial different financial literacy clubs in different high schools across the state. Also, there's going to be another competition coming up in the fall that's going to be a statewide financial literacy competition for students. And you know, it just is amazing what's going on with his office and what's going on with schools. And things have come a long way since the kids have gotten some education as far as what to do when you get out of school. Far beyond balancing a checkbook, let's put it that way.
Yeah, and I've read a couple of Pew Research and some other studies, Teresa, over the last couple of years. And the numbers, I mean, it's very disturbing when Pew Research asks a bunch of 25 or 30-year-olds, how comfortable are you with financial literacy? And 60% say not at all. I mean, that is a major problem as these individuals are going through the process of buying homes, starting families, getting into the workforce, maybe looking at opening a small business when you don't have those basic financial literacy skills and admit that you don't have those skills. That from my vantage point, begins to create a major problem long-term here across the United States.
Oh, absolutely. And that's what Treasurer Breiner is trying to promote. Talking with him by phone last week, you know, this all comes down to, you know, I asked you, you know, you're so busy with everything. Of course, this is an important subject, but what drives you to do this? And he's like, his own personal story.
His father lost his job twice when he was growing up. When he was a young child, seeing that happen with his father, they didn't have maybe savings or what he called a rainy day account put on the side.
So that really hit a nerve with him. And he says he's sees that today. Also, sees it with people who are really successful. He said they just don't want to face different forms of reality when it comes to financial literacy, and maybe they can be much better at it.
So, yeah, this is something he has a personal feeling toward, getting this started at a young age with young kids and teenagers. And Teresa, we've also seen the success of some private versions of this. I think probably one of the most popular would be Dave Ramsey and his Financial Peace University. They also offer a lot of high school and church programs all across the United States with millions of people a year taking advantage of these programs. Again, going back to these basic concepts of what is debt and everything else as it relates to financial literacy.
Unfortunately, not a lot which is taught in the public education system. No, no, there isn't. I do believe now they do have a financial literacy requirement for seniors in North Carolina, but I'm not sure how far it delves into it. But yeah, it's not really, it's something that really needs to be considered with everything going on. You know, you've got credit card offers.
I know that, I don't know if it's still popular today, but in colleges, it used to be all these credit card companies be out there handing you applications for credit. You know, credit cards are free money, right? It's not free money, but how to better manage your money and talking about mortgages and you're going to have student loans possibly and just budgeting money with inflation. You've got gas, you've got electric bills, all the things that you have to face when you become an adult, you get out of school, right?
So it's really a really good thing to have all these skills and know what you're doing when it comes to financial literacy, as Treasurer Breiner explained with this new internship program. You've got an example of this internship program in your story over at CarolinaJournal.com, a sophomore from a high school in Cary, just outside of our state's capital, a suburb of Raleigh. To walk us through this 15-year-old's amazing story, Teresa. Yeah, amazing is the best word to describe it. His name's Sohum Kunde.
He's a sophomore at Green Level High School in Kerry. And he is piloting the internship program right now in the treasurer's office. He found out about it by emailing the department after he checked out their website and their newsletter. I don't know many 15-year-olds that would be doing that, right? But he said that he really became interested in finance when he was very young.
Chris's father helped the two of them co-wrote, it's got his name on it, but he says dad helped him write a book on investing. Called the TForce Trading Strategy, an essential blueprint for stock investing. It's on Amazon right now. You can go pick up a copy if you want. Um just you know well not promoting it, but I mean He says from a young age, he was just amazed at financial uh everything that comes with finances and investments and Uh I said, when I talked to him, I'm like, how old are you?
You're 15 and you published a book already? I'm like, and it's not like, oh, an easy to read book. This is about investment strategies. It's way, way above a lot of people, your age, my age, everybody out there.
So to have someone who's that, you know, well-versed in that at such a young age and talking the way he talked over the phone, I said, you have a really bright future ahead of you, which it's just amazing. He's met with so many people. He goes on Fridays in the treasurer's office and works with them. And he's really, you know, he really wants to impose financial literacy across the schools, across the state. He mentioned a statistic too about how people really don't know a lot about financial literacy.
So yeah, just an amazing, amazing young man in this program. And yeah, there's just, that is the best word, amazing. And Teresa, I would presume if we kind of extrapolated this out to other state agencies, and let's be clear: we're talking about an internship. We're not talking about running around the office and grabbing coffee for people. I don't know that you're going to take a whole lot away from an internship on that, but you look at the treasurer's office, you look at the state auditor's office, some of these very high-level positions here in North Carolina.
The treasurer is responsible literally for tens of billions of dollars a year in the state of North Carolina over at the auditor's office side, still in the financial realm as it relates to these audits, getting these middle school or even high schoolers into these state agencies at young ages and actually seeing what is going on behind the scenes. You talk about inspiring the next generation of getting involved in either the public or private sector. I can't literally think of a better way than this. No, no, I can't either. I can't either.
And that's something Treasure Reiner talked with me about. He said that, you know, aside from, you know, maybe taking some basics, getting some literacy skills, getting these clubs set up, he actually said, you know, let's have these kids, these young adults, take a look at maybe the rainy day fund, different ways to fund maybe hurricane recovery, disaster recovery in the state. Not saying that they're going to put them fully in charge, but they want to hear their ideas. They want to see what they can come up with, and maybe they will implement a few of these ideas.
So, I mean, it's really worth the shot for these kids to be taking in this internship and these different clubs and to, you know, maybe, like you say, do more than just run coffee over or pick up a phone or take notes or whatever. It just, it's a really, really good way to get your foot in the door. And that is something that Soham actually told me. He said, you know, after graduation from whatever college he goes to, looking at different jobs, he possibly would like to come. Back to the treasurer's office.
So it's a win-win for the different offices across the state if they implement these kind of internship programs. And they also, it's a win for maybe different ideas that come out of this that maybe will be truly helpful and help maybe the taxpayer in the end. Yeah, helping the taxpayer in the end, always a great opportunity to talk about there. Teresa, you've got some details on the internship plus a couple of the interviews that we have chatted about during the interview here this morning. Where can folks go and get those details?
Sure, they can head on over to CarolinaJournal.com. We really appreciate the information this morning. Teresa Opeka joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. Yeah. It's 5.37.
Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM. WBT, I'm Nick Craig. Good Monday, or good Tuesday morning to you. Last week here on the Carolina Journal News Hour, we brought you the latest out of the Leandro lawsuit that has been going on for nearly 30 years, or I should say more accurately, more than 30 years here in North Carolina. Long story short, school districts back in the early 1990s claiming that there was not enough money going to some rural school districts across the state of North Carolina.
That case has transformed dramatically since it was originally filed. Back just a couple of weeks ago, the North Carolina Supreme Court officially dismissed the case, throwing it out and ending the Leandro lawsuit. Last week, the coverage and details that we had were that some groups in that case wanted to petition the North Carolina Supreme Court for a rehearing, essentially to take another look at the case. That brings us to this morning where legislative lawmakers are now jumping back in on this thought of a rehearing. It walks through some of those details.
Mitch Kokai from the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. Mitch, it's relatively complicated when you're going through a Legal challenge that started back in the early 1990s. What are lawmakers having to say about this request or this petition for a rehearing at the North Carolina Supreme Court? Nick, you've already hit some of the highlights, but just to recap, in early April, the state Supreme Court came out with a ruling that essentially ended the Leandro case after 32 years. They basically said the case had gotten far off track from what it was originally designed to do, and any ruling that took place in the case after 2017 was going to be declared void.
And so anything that happened in that case after 2017, including all of the orders for additional education spending and the order that would call for the state controller and treasurer and director of the budget to move money without the General Assembly being involved, all of that gets thrown out.
So we thought the case was pretty much over. And then as we talked about in our last conversation about this, five local school boards who were among the original plaintiffs in the case filed in the trial court a request to stay the execution of the mandate from the Supreme Court. And essentially, what that means is the Supreme Court said, shut the case down, but please don't do it yet because we're going to petition the Supreme Court for a rehearing. That was what we were reported on the last time.
Now, the petition had not yet been filed at that point, but it was promised to be filed. A couple days later, The legislative leaders who've been trying to shut down the case filed a new piece of paperwork at the trial court level saying, look. The same day that this request came in to stay the mandate is the day that the mandate was supposed to come out. And so there's no reason to do this. Also, what is being requested by these school boards, the trial court can't do because the Supreme Court ordered the case ended with prejudice, meaning it ends.
You can't file anything else. There's no opportunity for anything else to happen in this case. And so the state legislators are basically saying, no, the case is over. That's what the Supreme Court said. And the trial court shouldn't do anything to delay the end of that case.
An interesting factor is as we are talking. We still haven't seen this petition for rehearing. And from what the legislators are saying, if there had been a petition for rehearing by the time that that initial A request for a stay was in, then perhaps the trial court Could have done something, but certainly it couldn't do anything before there was a petition for rehearing. And there still isn't, as we're talking, a petition for rehearing. And so, from the legislator's standpoint, the deadline has passed, and everything points to the trial court shutting this case down completely, and that the Supreme Court is unlikely to do anything to change that.
Now, of course, this doesn't end the debate. Over education funding in North Carolina. It doesn't even throw out the prospect of some new lawsuit or lawsuits that would deal with education funding issues. But in terms of the Leandro case, what the legislators are saying in their court filing is the Supreme Court has struck the case down. There's nothing more that can be done about it.
A trial court can't make any changes. And if there's going to be some sort of rehearing, it's probably too late because the deadline to have filed that rehearing petition would have already passed at some point last week.
Well, Mitch, and not trying to sound like a shill for the North Carolina General Assembly, but they make a really good point there. I mean, this is not a new case. This is a case that has been incredibly high profile. Going back decades here in North Carolina, the idea that you would tell the trial court judge, hey, hold off on this on literally the day in which that case is supposed to essentially be turned off and still multiple business days later, still nothing filed official, at least that was available to the public at this point with the North Carolina Supreme Court is a very interesting situation. Yeah, definitely is.
And one would suspect that if the plaintiffs in this case really had a notion that they wanted to get a rehearing, that they would have filed that request fairly early on. That the decision from the Supreme Court came out April 2nd. We were not expecting anything to come out from the Supreme Court that day.
So to see something responding to the Supreme Court's decision that day probably would have been a surprise. But certainly. The following week, or even the week after that, you could have seen something from the plaintiff saying, Look, we're going to ask for the Supreme Court to rehear this case, and this is why. These are the reasons why we think there should be rehearing. And then, once that paperwork was in the pipeline, then you could go back to the trial court and say, Look, we're asking for this rehearing.
Here's the petition. You see it right there.
So, while this is while the Supreme Court is deciding this, please hold off. on dealing with any mandate that comes to the trial court from the Supreme Court that would shut down this case prematurely. But the request for a stay came down on the same day that the mandate was supposed to issue, according to the legislators. And we, at that point, had not seen a petition for a rehearing. And at this point, as we're talking, still have not seen a petition for a rehearing.
And so it sounds as if If the legislators have their timing right and their legal arguments right, that the deadline to seek a rehearing would have passed by now. And the Leandro case should be shut down, which is what the Supreme Court called for on a 4-3 vote back on April 2nd. Mitch, it's kind of in the weeds, but it's, you know, we talk, you've you joined us, I don't even know how many times over the last year and a half, talking about a litany of various legal questions and challenges here on the Carolina Journal News Hour. I feel like the trial court judge is kind of in an odd position here. He's got this mandate from the North Carolina Supreme Court: hey, close this thing out.
Now you've got this group of these school districts and these school boards saying, hey, actually, hold on a second, tap the brakes there. We're going to file something with the North Carolina Supreme Court and ask for this rehearing. It's just got to be an odd situation for the trial court to be dealing with, again, because this is coming seemingly at the 11th hour. A very odd situation, and it's sort of an unusual position for this judge anyway, because remember, the Leandro case has been assigned for decades to a particular judge. For years and years, it was Wake County Judge Howard Manning.
When he had to step down, it went to a Union County Judge David Lee. Who's the one who came up with the controversial rulings ordering the general assembly ordering the state to spend more money and then ordering state executive branch officials to bypass the general assembly to make sure that money got spent? But since Judge Lee, we've seen two different judges. And the current trial judge who's assigned to this case, James Ammons, has really only been with the case for the last few years and had one hearing at which his job was to determine, based on an order from the previous Democratic-led state Supreme Court, to determine how much money had to be spent based on a previous order. But that was his only real role in the case.
And so he works on other things and just basically had this Leandro, one Leandro hearing, one Leandro ruling, and then stepped away from the case really for a couple of years to deal with other issues. And so it's an odd situation to put him in to say, wait a minute, I have to step back into Leandro after not having had anything. To do with this case for essentially three years and to have to decide: all right, you know, the Supreme Court told me to do this. The plaintiffs in the case are asking for a delay. It is an odd situation for that judge to be in.
Mitch, there's a lot of discussion on a variety of different cases about judicial discretion. We're not going to go fully down that rabbit hole here this morning. But in this case, again, as laying out the details, you've got this very clear order from the North Carolina Supreme Court. This thing is done with prejudice, no more. We're not going down this discussion anymore.
And then this last-minute filing from some of the plaintiffs in this case. Typically, how does something like this play out when you've got an order from a higher court that says close this thing out, yet you've got some of the groups in this trying to, I guess, kind of prolong and stretch this thing out seemingly even further after 32 years?
Well, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. As we're speaking, neither the Supreme Court has said anything, which you suspect they wouldn't say anything until they see a petition because their order said end the case. And that's the last thing that they've said. We haven't seen anything, as we're talking now, from the trial judge in this case, which would either be, yes, I grant the stay until we find out what happens in your rehearing or no, the mandate was to issue on the 22nd, and it's issued, and the case is over. We haven't seen that yet either.
We also haven't seen, as we're talking now, the actual petition for the rehearing to explain why the Supreme Court should rule.
So I suspect that we will see. One of these things in the not too distant future, we'll either see something from the trial judge saying yes or no to a stay.
some sort of petition for the rehearing. And if nothing else, a ruling from the Supreme Court saying. You know, we said, shut down the case, shut down the case.
So one of those things is going to happen. It may even be happening as we're chatting about it. The case, the Supreme Court said, should be shut down. The argument from the General Assembly's lawyers is. Any deadline or any deadline that would have allowed that not to happen has already passed, so it has to be shut down.
And we've yet to see the arguments from the five school boards asking for the stay about why they even think there should be a rehearing.
So it remains unresolved, but my suspicion is that there will be some sort of resolution soon. All right, Mitch, final question for you, I promise. If the judge in this case, the trial judge that we're talking about in this case, says, hey, you guys missed the deadline. I got very clear orders from the North Carolina Supreme Court. We're shutting this thing down.
Once that happens, do the plaintiffs in this case, would they even have the ability to request that rehearing from the North Carolina Supreme Court? Or would that just be said and done at that point? I think it would be done. I mean, once again, I don't want to put on a lawyer's hat when I'm not a lawyer, but I think that once the mandate is executed and the case is done, it's done. And there would not be a chance for a rehearing after that.
Someone who knows more about the law might give you a different answer and say, well, no, under rule X and such, we can call for this rehearing still. But my guess is, once the mandate is issued, the case is over, which is why the school boards went to the trial court to try to get a stay. Because if they don't get to stay and the mandate is executed and the case is ended, then that pretty much shuts the door on their opportunities.
Now, some bright lawyer somewhere might come up with an exception to the rule that would allow the case to move forward. But my guess is, once that mandate is issued, It's done, and if you want to go to court over Leandro-related issues, you probably have to file a new suit with some new claims, and that's what some people have been arguing anyway. In fact, the initial Leandro author Burley Mitchell, former state Supreme Court Chief Justice, who's now 85 years old, he wrote a recent column saying. He thinks that there probably should be a new lawsuit on behalf of all the school children in North Carolina that focuses not on education funding, but on education adequacy. But his column also did not criticize at all the state Supreme Court for the action that it took in shutting down the case.
So there's likely to be more litigation, but whether it takes place in context of this particular suit remains to be seen, and the chances seem pretty slim. Yeah, and a couple of different options there that you laid out, Mitch, on how this thing plays out. We know that you'll be keeping a close eye on that, and we'll keep you up to date, of course, on our website, CarolinaJournal.com. We appreciate all the information this morning. Mitch Coke from the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour.
Good morning again. It's 5:56. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk 107.9 WBT. We are kicking off the second week of the General Assembly's 2026 short session as lawmakers are expected to be back in Raleigh both today and tomorrow to deal with a litany of issues as we continue through the short session. One of the things that will be happening today is that lawmakers will finalize a $319 million plan to fully fund the state's Medicaid program, also known as the Medicaid rebase.
After lawmakers in the House and the Senate make their final approval, it will go to the governor's desk, not expecting any major issues there. And once again, looking at the House calendar for this morning, 10:30 a.m., there does remain six veto overrides on the calendar. Those include Senate Bill 50, constitutional carry, a couple of DEI-related Bills as well. Not immediately clear whether lawmakers in the North Carolina House have the votes to take it up, but with the big news over the last couple of days with two Democrat lawmakers in Mecklenburg County changing their party affiliation, it could be interesting to watch. We'll keep you up to date over at CarolinaJournal.com.
Well, that's going to do it for a Tuesday edition. WBT News is next. Followed by Good Morning BT. We're back with you tomorrow morning, 5 to 6, right here on Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9, WBT.
