Welcome & Ballot Basics

Amanda Benbow Lunn 0:08

Hello friends, welcome back to the NC Deep Dive. I am your host, Amanda Benbow Lunn. This episode features another of our candidate conversations for the 2026 general election. By my best accounting, it looks like we have 18 contested races with 46 candidates in Southern Wake County, specifically Holly Springs and Fuquay Varena. There are other races that will have only one candidate running, and just as an FYI, we will not be including those races in our candidate conversations. Of course, the races on your particular ballot will vary based on your address and the specific districts your residence falls within. You can always find your jurisdictions and your sample ballot by searching the NC Voter Search made available by the NC State Board of Elections. Once you get to the page, you'll enter your information. It will pop up all those who share your name or the information you provided. You'll scroll until you find you and just verify that your name and address are correct. And then you'll scroll down to the sections that you're looking for. Since there are so many races, please keep in mind your ballot will likely have both a front and a back. So make sure you flip it over when you're voting. And if your time is short, you can see each episode's transcripts along with each episode's chapter titles for particular questions at www.ncdeepdive.com. So if you find it easier to skim through the information and read it, you can do that, or you can just pick the particular chapters that interest you. For this particular episode, we are delving into the North Carolina Court of Appeals for seat one. There are two candidates running in this race, and you will have the opportunity to vote for one of them. The two candidates are John S. Arrowwood with the Democratic Party and Michael C. Byrne with the Republican Party. Without further ado, my friends, let's dive in.

Michael C. Byrne: Intro, Why, & Experience

Amanda Benbow Lunn 2:09

On this episode, I am honored to be speaking with Judge Michael C. Byrne, who's running for the North Carolina Court of Appeals for seat one. Welcome. If you want to take a few moments to introduce yourself, and then you can go into why you're running for this office and what experiences have prepared you to serve in this role.

Michael C. Byrne 2:30

Well, first of all, thank you for having me. It's a real honor to appear on your podcast. I'm running for Court of Appeals for the same reason that I became administrative law judge. You know, I grew up in Wake County. My parents were state employees. My father worked for DHHS, and my mother was a Wake County public school teacher. So there's a tradition of state service in my family going back to the 1970s. I was really blessed with a successful career as an attorney representing regular working people. I represented state employees and police, the people who keep our state working and the people who keep our families safe. Most of those cases at the trial level were in what's called the Office of Administrative Hearings, and that is an independent agency with judicial powers that hears disputes between citizens and agencies. I did 270 plus cases there on the trial level, more than 20 cases in the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, and was an amicus or friend of the court or second chair and quite a few more. In 2020, I began talks with our then chief administrative law judge, Julian Mann III, about becoming an administrative law judge myself. And the reason for that was very simple. Again, I figured it was time to give something back and to engage in some public service. So I was sworn into that job on June 1st, 2020. And now I'm seeking to take the next step by running for North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 3:56

What a time to be starting that as COVID had just hit.

Michael C. Byrne 3:59

Yes, it was interesting. When I started, almost our entire office was working remote. But judging is to a large extent sort of an independent job anyway. And whether you're doing it at home or doing it remote or something like that, but you know, obviously it was better when people came back. But um, you know, a lot of the stuff just involves having your door closed and doing the work.

Appellate Court Versus Trial Court

Amanda Benbow Lunn 4:32

What is fundamentally different about serving on an appellate court rather than a trial court?

Michael C. Byrne 4:37

Well, there's two things. My remarks are confined to the court of appeal since that's what I'm running for. The court of appeals is what's called an error correcting court. And that means that they take rulings from administrative law judges like me, superior court judges, and district court judges, and they review them for legal error. That's the part that pretty much everybody knows about. There's some level of precedence. There are court of appeals cases that created binding precedent in the state that lasted for 40 or 50 years. One example is a case called Walker versus DHR. And it was decided in 1991 and it addressed the question of what was just cause or a legal reason to dismiss a state employee for unsatisfactory job performance, which just sounds just like what it sounds. They're not doing their job right. That case never got near the Supreme Court. And I cited that case last week in one of my decisions. So there is a precedental value. The second thing they do that probably doesn't get as much attention as it should is that the court of appeals does not find facts. In other words, if I as a trial judge decide that a car was blue, the court of appeals would not issue an opinion saying, no, Burma was wrong, the car was red. What they will do, though, is view challenges to a lower court's factual findings to see if those facts were supported by competent evidence in the record. In other words, is there evidence to support the find that was made? That's particularly important to me because as administrative law judge, I have two roles among others. I have to get the law right, but I also have to make findings of fact, and those facts have to be supported by adequate evidence in the record. So having filled that role for over six years now, I think that learning how to find facts that are adequately supported by the record will be of great benefit on the court of appeals when I have to determine whether a lower court ruling's facts are supported by the evidence.

Biggest Issue

Amanda Benbow Lunn 6:27

What do you believe is the most important issue or challenge facing the people you would represent?

Michael C. Byrne 6:33

Well, first of all, on the court of appeals, I wouldn't really be representing anybody. I mean, that there wouldn't be a side. So the court of appeals here is a huge amount of cases. I mean, by contrast, in the Office of Administrative Hearings alone, we hear a hundred different kinds of claims. And each one of those theoretically could make its way up to the court of appeals. We add that with the trial courts, with criminal courts, civil courts, family. Um the most important issue facing any court of appeals litigant, I would argue, is the case that they are litigated. I long ago learned in this profession there's no such thing as a small case. And when I hear a case, whether it's at the Office of Administrative Hearings or in the Court of Appeals, even if the subject matter may seem somewhat simple, for example, we hear in OAH very, very complex cases called certificate of need that deals with where who and where can operate a hospital. And they will often involve teams of lawyers, nine lawyers, three weeks of hearing, thousands of pages of documents, hundreds of millions of dollars at stake. At the other end of the spectrum, we hear turnpike quick pass appeals. So for example, if you're driving in the toll roads around Raleigh and you're unhappy with your charge, you can bring it to us. Well, obviously, there is a huge degree of complexity and monetary value between those two cases, but your turnpike pass case is vitally important to you. So again, I would simply reiterate that the most important issue facing a litigant is the case that they have. It could be their freedom. It could be they were charged to pay a penalty, it could be their termination of their parental rights. So they are hugely important, serious issues that have to be addressed quickly because the old saying is true, justice delayed is justice denied, and also to get

Priorities & Hopes for Accomplishment

Michael C. Byrne 8:18

the law right.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 8:18

If elected, what would you prioritize and what specifically would you hope to accomplish during your term?

Michael C. Byrne 8:24

Well, uh that that's a great question. First of all, the the court of appeals is what I call a workhorse court, not a showed horse court. The Supreme Court gets a lot of, for lack of a better word, attention, but 95% of all appeals in North Carolina end at the Court of Appeals. Court of appeals decides there were a thousand cases a year. Supreme Court decides less than 100. And we touched on that a little bit earlier about the precedental value they can have. So as someone who represented working people for so many years, a lot of those people were wrongfully dismissed. They were without jobs and correspondingly were without income. I first hand saw the devastating effects on my clients of waiting around for a judge to make a decision. And in my own role as Administrative Law Judge, again, in just over six years, I have issued over 400 decisions because I've spent so long writing decisions. Before I became a judge, I drafted decisions for judges. Justice delayed is truly justice denied. So I would prioritize getting my docket or my caseload properly under control so that people are not waiting around for opinions to issue. Because that delay, I've seen people lose their homes, I've seen people lose their marriages, credit destroyed, finances destroyed, all because the judge didn't get the work done. You know, one of the things I hear and sort of concentrate in are state personnel cases, and that makes sense because I did them for so long. Well, there's a statutory requirement, it's in GS 126 34.02, that a personnel case has to be decided and a final decision issued, in other words, the opinion written issued within 180 days of filing. Now that sounds like a lot, but it really isn't, because you've got to knock 30 days off the end for the parties to write proposed decisions, another 30 days off of that for the transcript to be prepared, and you've got to have that case tried and done in 120 days. That includes discovery, everything that's you know encompassed in a lawsuit. There is a sort of what I call get out of jail free card on that requirement called extraordinary cause. And it was true in the past that some folks would say, well, you know, it's extraordinary cost. My position is not getting your work done is not extraordinary cause. That's just not getting your work done. And I think that people cannot be left to just sit around waiting to get a decision because the judge didn't get it done. So that would be my top priority.

What's Working Well & What Needs Changed

Amanda Benbow Lunn 10:49

Okay. What needs improving and what is working well within our judicial system?

Michael C. Byrne 10:54

Well, one thing that really concerns me is what I see is the continuing public perception that all judges, quote, have a side. I think the media has been a contributor to that over the years. Some of the media tried to reduce this to a zero-sum gain, that one party or side loses and the other side wins. And we've all seen those headlines. A stunning setback for the Bush administration, a sharply divided Supreme Court. And if you look at polling data, we see, I think we'd be ignoring reality to note that people have an increased suspicion that judges are not impartial, that the system is not impartial. And in reality, judges generally are. You know, again, I was fortunate enough to appear when you add it all up in probably more than 30 appellate cases in one role or another. And never once did I look up at the bench and say, I wonder what party that judge is. My trial court judge friends in superior court, a very gifted one in particular, said, you know, Michael, when I'm sitting up there, they don't ask if I'm a Republican or a Democrat. They just want to know if I'm a sentence of the life in prison. Now, can I fix that public perception that we're talking about on my own? No, I can't. That would take someone with a lot more authority than I have. What I can do is hopefully set an example in my own cases that would give people confidence that their case is being fairly and impartially decided, and then hopefully in some small way, no matter how big or small, increase people's confidence in the system generally. You know, as administrative Law Judge, thanks to the non-unitary nature of our state executive, I hear cases involving agencies that are run by Democrats and by Republicans. And the difference in the way I treat them is nothing because there's not a Democrat or Republican law. The law is the same for everyone. And if judges just keep that in mind, you know, maybe we could sort of collectively work toward restoring that trust in our system that that sadly it appears too many people have lost.

How Judges Read Statutes

Amanda Benbow Lunn 12:51

Okay. How should an appellate judge approach a case when reasonable judges could interpret the law differently?

Michael C. Byrne 12:57

Well, one of the really good things about being a court appeals judge, or for that matter, an administrative law judge, is we have a pretty good body of precedent in North Carolina. We have instructions on how to do statutory interpretation. And the law, going back many, many years, is very, very clear. If the statute itself is clear by plain reading, you follow that. If the statute, to use perhaps an overly simplistic example, says, you know, all red cars shall have a striped paint on the trunk, then you follow that. It's only when the statute is vague that you would engage in sort of statutory construction. And the Supreme Court over the years has given us a really good set of tools for doing that, all with the ultimate goal of implementing the General Assembly's intent. Because that's always a question, you know, vagueness. What did the General Assembly mean here? You know, my personal opinions as to what a statute means or should mean simply aren't material. My job is simply, at whatever level I'm a judge, is to simply implement that statute, apply it, read it plainly if I can, and if I can't, I use usually well-established principles of statutory interpretation to try to get to what the General Assembly intended.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 14:06

Okay.

Evaluating Factual Record

Amanda Benbow Lunn 14:07

How should an appellate court evaluate the factual record developed by a trial court?

Michael C. Byrne 14:12

Well, uh, once again, there are procedures for that as well. Appellant review in North Carolina is governed by two issues. And I'm going to use the administrative law one as an example because it's pretty nice and simple. In the Administrative Procedure Act, there are multiple allegations that somebody can make when they're appealing a decision, affected by error of law, et cetera, et cetera. So one set of those is what's called legal review challenges. And they are reviewed what's called de novo. The court appeals looks at them fresh, you know, no deference to my decision, except in rare cases we won't bother getting into, and says, did they get the law right? The other ground for factual challenges is something called the whole record test. And in that case, the appellate judge's responsibility is to examine the whole record, looking at all evidence that detracts, subtracts, and supports that factual finding. And that appellate review is limited to is there sufficient evidence to support that judge's factual finding? The court of appeals is not going to go in and say, to use an early example, you know, Byrne found that the car was red, we find that it's blue. They don't do that. What they would review is looking at the record, is there enough factual evidence in the record to support Byrne's finding that the car was red or blue? Even if we ourselves may have come to a different conclusion. So that's the way that you would approach

Judicial Restraint Defined

Michael C. Byrne 15:34

that.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 15:34

Okay. What does judicial restraint mean to you?

Michael C. Byrne 15:37

Yeah, that's a term that gets tossed around a lot in various contexts. As a court of appeals judge or even as a lower court judge, there is always, I suppose, a temptation to, for lack of a better word, opine on things. And that's a temptation I generally try to resist. Now, sometimes you have to say something, right? But judicial restraint means, number one, not having some kind of personalized stake in the outcome. You know, when a case appears before me, I'm not rooting for one side or another. And the judge who does that should probably find another job. I think it was Hugo Black, the great Supreme Court justice, who talked about judges should avoid the notion that they have a quote, roving commission to do good. You know, our job, judicial restraint, would mean to simply enforce the law as written and resolve the case that's in front of you because we are not there to make policy. If I run to make policy, I would run for the General Assembly. And with all due respect to that August body, that's simply not happening.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 16:41

Fair enough.

Impartiality Defined in Practice

Amanda Benbow Lunn 16:43

And you talked a little bit about impartiality earlier. What does impartiality mean in practice?

Michael C. Byrne 16:48

Well, again, it starts with not having a side. A judge who brings their political views to the bench is a judge who needs to find another job. A judge who cannot be impartial needs to find another job. A judge who has a personal stake in the case that would color their decision needs to recuse themselves from the case. Impartiality is simply applying the law fairly consistently, no matter who is in front of you, where they're from, what they look like, or what the issues are. And as long as you approach it that way, then you're generally in pretty good shape.

Judicial Independence Defined

Amanda Benbow Lunn 17:23

Okay. What does judicial independence mean to you?

Michael C. Byrne 17:26

Well, that's very simple. Our enabling statute at the Austin administrate here is 7A GS7A780. And it refers to our office as being, and it uses this term, being a source of quote, independent administrative logic. So I take my independence as a judge very, very seriously. And as you might imagine, when you're making decisions involving state agencies and whether they file the law or not, you know, you inevitably probably end up making somebody mad. But you can't let that affect your judgment. You have to be independent. And if someone ever came to me and tried to put pressure on me to rule one way or the other, I'd send them packing in very short order, to say the least. Because to fall back on what I said before on that, I hear cases involving agencies of both parties. As an appellate judge, I would hear cases from people of all kinds of different parties, faiths, beliefs, creed, whatever term you want to use. And what they all have in common is that everyone is protected in the same way by the same laws and the same rights. And you simply cannot, cannot, under any circumstances, favor or disfavor one group or another. You just simply have to follow the law at all times.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 18:40

All right.

Approach to the Responsibilities and Decision-Making Authority of this Office

Amanda Benbow Lunn 18:41

How would you approach the responsibilities and decision-making authority of this particular office?

Michael C. Byrne 18:47

Well, we touched on that a little bit earlier when I talked about a top priority would be getting the work done. I would also make sure I showed up for work, but what I mean that even back during COVID that we talked about earlier, I generally shied away from doing hearings remotely, at least in terms of my presence, because people wait a long time to have their cases heard. And my argument was always their taxes are not paying to have me sitting in front of this picture back here, as pretty as I think it is, you know, wearing pajamas. They need a judge sitting in front of the flags of North Carolina and the United States, and it needs to be a proper court proceeding. So you need to make sure that people know that they are being heard, that they are being respected, their case is being respected. And also you need to have sufficient technical knowledge and mastery of the law to be able to write a well-reasoned decision. I think that I've been fortunate enough to demonstrate that in my own job. Of those 400 decisions that I referenced, 11 of my cases were appealed to higher courts and reviewed. All 11 were affirmed. I had 10 unanimous affirmances by the Court of Appeals against zero reversals, and I had an affirmance by the Supreme Court against zero reversals. So that's the other thing, too. You have to have to have confidence that the judge who's hearing your case has sufficient technical knowledge and mastery of the law to make a reasoned and competent

Role of Real World Consequences in Decision Making

Michael C. Byrne 20:16

decision.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 20:16

What role, if any, should the real-world consequences of a ruling play in appellate decision making?

Michael C. Byrne 20:23

Very little, if any. You simply have to follow the law where it goes.

Deciding What Takes Precedence

Amanda Benbow Lunn 20:27

When priorities compete or resources are limited, how would you decide what takes precedence?

Michael C. Byrne 20:32

I'm not sure I completely understand the question, but I would say that scarcity of resources is a universal problem in most places. I am very fortunate in that since I was a solo practitioner for 25 years, I have a great deal of self-sufficiency. When there was a letter to be mailed, I wrote it, I put it in an envelope, I put a stamp on it. When there's a fax to be sent, and we still use faxes, I sent the fax and pressed the send button. So I can compensate for a lot of resource deprivation that exists simply by being self-sufficient because I did it for so long.

Accountability: What & How

Amanda Benbow Lunn 21:07

Okay. Well, what should voters hold you accountable for if you're elected and how?

Michael C. Byrne 21:11

Well, the first is there's a couple of things. We touched on this earlier with showing up for work. I don't believe in being a Zoom judge. I believe that you'd elected me to a public office, so I need to be down there at the court of appeals every day in my chambers or hearing oral arguments working, right? That's the first thing. The second thing is getting the work done. Having an elected office like that is an incredibly high honor in public trust. And just like in my present job, the taxpayers, it never must be forgotten, are both the decision makers and who holds the job and people who are paying your salary. And you owe them your best efforts at all times to get the work done and get it out. Third, of course, is to get the law right. And another one I'd add is just collegiality. A continuing problem. When I first broke into the legal profession in the mid to late 1990s, I'd hear, you know, Older lawyers talk about, you know, there's this isn't the profession, the collegiality there used to be. And when I first started practicing, you know, now 30 odd years ago, I was in a small town in western North Carolina, and we would have district court twice a week. And at lunchtime, the attorneys, the DA, and the judge would all go to lunch together. And that used to be the common practice throughout North Carolina. And in 2026, if you propose that, people look at you like you had two heads because everybody's too busy fighting. This is a profession where collegiality should be prominent. It should be practiced. I have often, when holding you know, court out of town, I hear cases all over the state. If there is an older lawyer I know who's on one side of the case, I will often look at them and say, let's you and I and Mr. or Mrs. X, the other lawyer, let's let's all go out to lunch. And the younger lawyers are almost universally surprised by that. And I think I can almost say, Oh, I really should talk to my clients. I'm like, you can talk to your client after we have lunch because collegiality matters. One of the things that we see increasingly with these, I guess I really am sounding a bit like old man yells at cloud here, but you learn by watching other people and emulating the people who do things right and hopefully learning from people who act somewhat differently. One of the ways that I did that as a young lawyer was at the calendar call process. It's the start of each week. You go in in front of the judge, the judge would call the calendar. And as funny as it sounds, that was often an uproariously fun time. Particularly if you've had a judge on the bench who was funny, which happened a lot. And you would see the older lawyers practicing and how they interacted with each other and amongst themselves. And you would learn that. You'd model that behavior. Well, now in a lot of counties, they don't even have calendar calling. It's all something like we're doing here. It's remote. Is that more efficient? Certainly. Is it probably more effective? Arguably. But when you do that, when you miss that social interaction with people, something is lost. And I would hope that people, I think some people in the profession are beginning to realize that and just recognize how important you know modeling professional behaviors is to make sure the next generation of lawyers is more collegial.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 24:17

And I think I would add to that, it allows you to see the humanity a little bit more in those that you're interacting with and vice versa.

Michael C. Byrne 24:25

I agree with you 100%. I mean, there's a reason that they call it the practice of law and not the something else. I mean, that's a term that goes all the way back to the medieval guilds and things like that. It is a profession. And one of the things that professionals learn by is from watching other professionals. You know, I was very fortunate coming along that I got to appear in front of some really good judges who became mentors. Judge Julian Mann, who hired me, was a titan of administrative law in the state. He had our office for 32 years. And he built it from a little old office into a nationally recognized administrative agency that was renowned knowing other things for its nonpartisanship, for its effectiveness. And those are the people you want to learn from. But to be fully honest with you, there were many times during my career as a lawyer where I'd see a judge do something and I would say, you know, if I become a judge, I'm never going to do that. And I'm not saying you can learn just as much from someone who does things, you know, maybe not quite the best way, but you can learn to avoid it because you always need to remember, no matter what kind of judge you are at whatever level, it's very easy to tear people down. You know, it's very easy to find fault. It is very easy to not be sympathetic. Well, my position is I set high standards and I hold people to them, but build somebody up, help make them better. I mean, isn't that what we're supposed to be about? Not only as judges, but as human beings, just to make people better. So that's something that is very, very important to me.

The Appellate Process

Amanda Benbow Lunn 25:56

All right. Could you walk us through for those who may not know what the appellate court looks like? How many judges are part of it? What do the panels look like? What does the daily workload look like? How do you make decisions or get things on your calendar? Do you give us some inside information on what that might look like?

Michael C. Byrne 26:14

Some of that I know, some of that I don't. Yeah, I spent a great deal of time around the court of appeals, but have never actually served there. But the court of appeals has 15 judges. They're elected for eight-year terms, and they generally hear cases in panels of three that are assigned by the chief judge. One judge is usually assigned to write an opinion. They hear the case as a panel of three and then somebody writes the opinion. Sometimes there is a dissent, you know, a two to one, and someone will write a dissenting opinion. They may write an opinion that is a concurrent opinion because they want to make some sort of specific point about something that they didn't think the majority opinion discussed. That happens. Sometimes people do something called I concur and result only, which is like, yeah, I'm okay with where you got, that you got there, but not necessarily sure of how you did. And then there are other cases that I believe, and don't you know quote me on this, certain kinds of cases are sort of assigned to a group panel because there's a certain level of you know factual legal consistency among them. I'm not really sure how that works. In terms of there is a thing known as on banc, where the entire 15 court appeals could theoretically rehear a case. The General Assembly put that into the law several years ago. I actually went as a lawyer to the General Assembly to testify against it because it struck me as a solution in search of a problem. The court appeals is constrained by a case called In-Ray Civil Penalty, which for our purposes here can be understood as if Court of Appeals panel A rules a certain way, Court of Appeals Panel B can't overrule that panel. You have to go to the Supreme Court. All right. So Enbanc was presented as a way to be promote consistency. And well, honestly, in-race civil penalty prohibits that anyway. So now and I think that the ultimate utility of the Enbanc provision is demonstrated by the fact that since it was put into law, I think probably close to 10 years ago, it's never actually been

When Cases Reach The NC Supreme Court

Michael C. Byrne 28:10

used.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 28:10

Okay. All right. Now, with my understanding, and maybe you can clarify, since the appellate court is the last part of the process for many folks, if you had one panel that ruled one way, would that be the end of the road for most cases? Would they have the ability to go to the state supreme court at that point?

Michael C. Byrne 28:30

So there's a couple of things that can happen there. I can point to one case in particular where you know the court appeals decisions take two forms this published and unpublished. Published means this bonding precedent, unless it's overruled by the Supreme Court or by the legislature. I did a case in, I think, 2015 that involved the issue of a written warning for a state employee. And I argued that a written warning to be used to further discipline the employee had to be what was called active. Written warning to expire in state personnel law after 18 months in most circumstances. And the court appeal said, yes, this has to be active. And it was an unpublished decision. And then literally a year later, one year later, another panel of the court appeals in a published decision says, no, no, they don't need to be active. So I'm sitting there throwing up my hands, going, what? And that's something that I think could and should have been, I would argue, easily discovered by whoever was doing the research there. But at one time, there was an automatic right of appeal to the Supreme Court if there was a dissent. Remember, we talked about that two to one thing? If somebody dissented, you had an automatic right to appeal, the General Assembly took that right away. And I, as a judicial candidate, I can offer no opinions on the wisdom or unwisdom of that action. So if you are unhappy with a decision of the court of appeals, you have the right to file, the shorthand is PDR, petition for discretionary review, where you ask the Supreme Court to hear a case. And the Supreme Court then has the authority to hear it or not hear it based upon how the individual members of the court vote. There are certain cases that go to the Supreme Court automatically. So prominent of them is decisions of the business court. They don't go to the court appeals at all, they go straight to the Supreme Court. Revenue cases are amongst those. So they go OAH business court, Supreme Court.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 30:16

And you mean the North Carolina Supreme Court, correct? Not the U.S. Supreme Court. Okay.

Michael C. Byrne 30:20

Correct. Right. And the other obvious example is death penalty cases. They go directly to the North Carolina Supreme Court.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 30:26

Okay.

Last Thoughts & Where to Learn More

Amanda Benbow Lunn 30:27

As we wrap up, do you have any last thoughts? Is there anything we haven't discussed that you would like voters to know or anything from our conversation that you'd like to expand upon or clarify?

Michael C. Byrne 30:36

Well, first of all, I want to thank you very much again for having me tonight.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 30:40

Absolutely. Thank you for joining.

Michael C. Byrne 30:41

Thank you. I think it's really important that when you're running for a statewide public office like this, that you try to speak with and most importantly listen to as many people as possible. But that, you know, you raise the question, why should somebody vote for me? Well, I think that comes down to a couple of things. One, I believe that I bring a unique perspective to the Court of Appeals and that I have now decades of expertise in a very complex but essential area of the law, specifically administrative law. And when the penalty is imposed for somebody pouring coal ash in our ponds, when an issue arises of a beach erosion, whether an issue arises of whether a state employee, again, who makes our state work was wrongfully dismissed, that's all administrative law. And rightly or wrongly, it can be very, very complex. So there are no prior administrative law judges in the court of appeals right now. So I know that I would bring demonstrated expertise in a complex and essential area of the law to that court. And that would bring a diversity of professional experience, I think would help everybody. The second thing is getting the law right. Again, Julian Mann, when he hired me, sat me down and he said, You've done 270 plus cases here. He looked at me, he says, Michael, get it right. And that was the entire training I received to be an ALJ. And he gave me the Raleigh docket, you know, two weeks later. Well, you know, 10 appeals later, I've been unanimously affirmed. So I think that the voters can look at that record and say he has an established record of getting the law right. And the third thing is that I care about people's rights. You know, one of the decisions I'm most proud of is a case, it's called uh Sullivan versus Hyde County DSS. Certain Department of Social Services employees in North Carolina are covered by North Carolina human resources laws. And when you terminate a career status, state or local government employee, they are entitled to notice of appeal rights because they have what's called a property interest in their job. And going back to if you're my age schoolhouse rock, you know that government cannot do what to your property, take it without due process. So in the employment complex employment context, notice of the right, the time limit, the procedure to appeal has to be given to the employee. Well, what this agency did is they gave them a letter saying, you're fired. If you don't like it, you can appeal. Our grievance policy is attached. And the employee filed their appeal in the wrong place. Right. And the agency moved to dismiss, and I said, not so fast. You have to have that information in the letter. That's what a dismissal letter says contain within the notice. You can't just attach a policy that's 20 or 30 pages long and say, that's notice. So the agency appealed that ruling to the core of appeals. And what was interesting about that is there was nobody on the other side. You know, this was a petitioner who is what we call pro se unpersented, and she wasn't in a position to file an appeal. Well, I was unanimously affirmed on that. And throughout my entire career, I did not represent rich people or big corporations. I represented ordinary working men and women who serve essential roles and who deserve fairness and have rights. I am proud to have been a labor lawyer. I am equally proud to be a judge who respects due process for everybody and makes decisions that protect that right. So those would be some of the reasons why I would hope that your viewers and everybody else would consider voting for me. You can find more information about my campaign. It's my initials, mbthenumbernc.com. And again, I would simply close by thanking you very much for your time tonight. It's been really interesting.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 34:26

And just to clarify for those listening, it's M B as in boy, and then the number four NC.

Michael C. Byrne 34:33

Okay. Yeah, I've had my name for 59 years and I'm certainly proud of it, but it's very hard to spell. So we just did the MB number four nc.com. I think it works pretty well.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 34:43

Keeping it simple, I like it. Thank you so much, Michael, for joining me today. I appreciate you taking the time to speak to voters directly and to share kind of the ins and outs about the judicial system that you were able to share today. So thank you, and I wish you the best of luck on your campaign.

Michael C. Byrne 35:00

Thank you very much and good night.

Closing Reflections & Voting Info

Amanda Benbow Lunn 35:02

Democracy is built on participation. Politics can sometimes feel distant or abstract, but the decisions made by our elected officials at the county, state, and federal levels have a profound effect on the communities we call home and the way we live our lives. From the roads we drive on and the schools our children attend to public safety, parks and recreation, housing, health care, taxes, the economy, and the many other services and amenities that make up our communities, government plays a role in shaping both our everyday experience and our future. That makes taking the time to understand the choices on your ballot and the people asking for your vote an important part of being an engaged member of your community. Early voting for the 2026 midterm election begins October 15th and runs through October 31st. In Southern Wake County, there will be early voting locations at the Hunt Center in Holly Springs, the Hilltop Needmore Town Park Clubhouse in Fuquay Varina, Beech Bluff County Park, and Southern Wake Tech Campus close by. Election Day is November 3rd. A general reminder that you will need a valid photo ID to vote, the regular voter registration deadline is October 9th, although you may still register when you vote during the early voting period. Please note that you cannot register to vote on Election Day itself, and that that day you will absolutely have to vote at your designated precinct location to have access to your full ballot. And because there are so many races and ballot measures this year, your ballot will likely be double-sided. It can be helpful to start on the back so that you don't accidentally overlook anything. You'll vote for the races that apply to your jurisdiction along with statewide amendments and for Southern Wake County voters, local Wake County bond referenda. Voting is one of the ways we take part in the communities we share. You don't have to agree with your neighbors or even with the candidates you've heard here to recognize that our communities are shaped by the people who show up, ask questions, learn about the choices before them, and cast their ballots. So please take the time to get informed, make your voice heard, and encourage the people around you to do the same. Your vote matters, your voice matters, and you absolutely matter, my friend. And with that, this episode of the NC Deep Dive has come to an end. Please feel free to check out this episode's show notes at ncdeepdive.com for further information and relevant links for this candidate along with general election information. As always, if you have any topics or thoughts you'd like to share, you can find us on social media or email us at ncdeepdive at gmail.com. If you found value in this episode, I'd love for you to subscribe, rate, and share it so that others may more easily be informed. Please make sure to stay tuned for all the relevant candidate, amendment, and referenda episodes for the 2026 midterm election by visiting ncdeepdive.com, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Audible, or wherever you currently listen to your podcast. Until next time, my friends, Namaste: The Love and Light in me sees and honors the love and light in you.