It's expected that state Republican lawmakers will consider overriding Gov. Josh Stein's vetoes on July 29, 2025. (Photo of NC Legislative Building by Clayton Henkel)
North Carolina lawmakers will return to Raleigh this week intending to override several — if not all — of Gov. Josh Stein’s vetoes on more than a dozen bills. When they do, it’ll be under the watchful eyes of numerous advocacy groups.
Among the overrides on tap: a controversial bill eliminating an emissions requirement for Duke Energy, another allowing permit-less carry of handguns for those over 18, and a wide-ranging bill defining gender in state law and restricting birth certificate changes.
Stein, a Democrat, has vetoed the bills over the past few weeks. Attempts to override them — in a Republican-dominated legislature — were all but inevitable. And in the weeks leading up to the anticipate override session, advocates on both sides of the aisle for multiple issues have pushed lawmakers to vote according to their preferences.
In order to override a veto, three-fifths of each chamber must approve. Senate Republicans will meet that threshold if all members are present and voting due to their 30-20 veto-proof supermajority.
Senate leader Phil Berger (R-Rockingham) said Stein’s vetoes indicate “he is out of touch with the people of North Carolina.”
“I look forward to leading Senate Republicans in overriding these harmful vetoes and putting North Carolina families first,” Berger said.
Over in the lower chamber, the GOP holds a 71-49 advantage. That’s one vote short of 60% by party lines.
Speaker Destin Hall (R-Caldwell) has said the override votes could be added to the calendar any time the House is in session.
Wide-ranging gender identity bill
House Bill 805, which began as a bill focused on preventing exploitation of women and children, was transformed into a conservative vehicle for several sections focused on gender.
Among its provisions: defining “male,” “female” and “biological sex” in state law; allowing parents to name library books their student cannot check out; banning state dollars from being used on gender-affirming care in prisons; and requiring the state to retain the original birth certificate when a transgender person changes the identified sex on theirs.
In the House, one Democrat — Rep. Dante Pittman (D-Wilson) — joined Republicans in favor of the bill. If Pittman remains in favor, it will be enough to override Stein’s veto. On Saturday night at a Democratic Unit Dinner, Pittman appeared to signal he would stand with Stein’s veto. “When I was sitting at my chair and I saw our governor come up on the screen, my resolve was hardened,” Pittman said before delivering the Salute to the Flag of North Carolina. “When it comes to the veto overrides,” he added, “we’ve got your back.”
Transgender and civil rights advocacy groups have voiced passionate opposition to the bill.
Christine Pontes, a social worker and advocate, wrote in an op-ed this month that the bill “targets the rights of transgender people and, in effect, seek to deny their existence.”
And activists on the other side of the issue, too, have urged Republicans to push it forward.
In a letter published in the conservative Carolina Journal, Payton McNabb — a former high school volleyball player who has emerged as a vocal opponent of transgender student athletes in North Carolina — called on lawmakers to “stand for common sense.”
“Turning this bill away is a betrayal of the young women he’s supposed to protect,” McNabb wrote.
Duke Energy emissions repeal
In the midst of the a sweltering summer, lawmakers will aim to lift an interim carbon reduction target for Duke Energy.
Under Senate Bill 266, dubbed “The Power Bill Reduction Act,” the utility would no longer need to meet a 70% reduction of 2005 levels in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030. The 2050 goal for carbon neutrality would remain in place. Both goals were set in state law as part of bipartisan legislation enacted in 2021.
Paul Newton, a former Duke Energy executive and state senator until he resigned in March, introduced related legislation that appeared to move through the chamber on a fast track.
“We remain focused on working with state leaders to power North Carolina’s continued success through smart investments and a reliable mix of energy resources while keeping costs as low as possible for our customers,” a Duke Energy spokesperson told NC Newsline.
With such quick movement, opponents say there wasn’t ample opportunity to provide input.
“It’s a great example of why an energy policy shouldn’t rush to make big policy decisions without having a much fuller opportunity for analysis and considerations of how there’s so many interrelated moving parts,” Southern Environmental Law Center senior attorney David Neal said.
Researchers at NC State University found that the bill could cost $23 billion in added fuel expenses through 2050 for ratepayers, according to a study released June 30.
Dan Crawford, North Carolina League of Conservation Voters’ governmental affairs director, said North Carolinians are working hard to keep food on the table and pay their bills.
“They’d be disappointed that lawmakers chose to put the profits of Duke Energy before them, and their short sighted decisions could lead to their power bills going up even more at a time when they can’t afford it,” he said.
Crawford noted there isn’t data at the moment on how many North Carolinians are aware of the legislation, but the group is working on its legislative scorecard to keep voters aware of which lawmakers voted to raise their electricity bills.
The NC Democratic Party, meanwhile, has urged supporters to email their lawmakers with a photo of their most recent power bill.
“Send it to your legislator with a clear message: ‘Do not raise our rates to line Duke Energy’s pockets,'” the party wrote in an emailed message to supporters. “Corporations should pay their fair share.”
In a statement explaining his veto on July 2, Stein made note of the rising temperatures and subsequent soaring utility bills that have plagued the summer months.
“This bill not only makes everyone’s utility bills more expensive, but it also shifts the cost of electricity from large industrial users onto the backs of regular people — families will pay more so that industry pays less,” he wrote. “This bill walks back on our state’s commitment to reduce carbon emissions, sending the wrong signal to businesses that want to be a part of our clean energy economy.”
Concealed handguns
Senate Bill 50 would allow North Carolinians over 18 to carry concealed firearms without applying for a permit. The measure, branded “constitutional carry” by conservative backers, is law in 29 other states. Supporters say the bill merely codifies a constitutional right.
The Senate approved the bill on a partisan, 26-18 vote, with all Republicans voting ‘yes’ and all Democrats voting ‘no.’ Six members were absent. In the House, the vote was 59-48, with two Republicans — Reps. William Brisson (R-Bladen) and Ted Davis (R-New Hanover) — joining Democrats in opposition. If Brisson and Davis remain opposed, it could make it much harder for Republicans to must the necessary three-fifths vote to override the veto.
In announcing his veto, Stein said:
The veto announcement also noted that the action had the support Sheriffs Charles Blackwood of Orange County and Clarence Birkhead of Durham County. The nonprofit group Moms Rising North Carolina issued a statement thanking Stein for vetoing what it termed “reckless legislation that would put us all in danger.”