The court ruled that Governor Stein should retain majority control over the Board of Transportation, the Economic Investment Committee, and the Commission for Public Health, confirming his continued influence over these bodies.

While the court refused to block legislative changes to several commissions, including environmental and coastal resources, it upheld the governor's majority control over key boards like transportation and public health.

A North Carolina appeals court has upheld the Republican-controlled legislature's authority to reduce the Democratic governor's appointment powers for certain commissions, while striking down other boards' compositions as exceeding legislative authority.

The court's decision reflects a constitutional debate where the governor argues he needs appointment control to faithfully execute laws, but lawmakers contend other elected officials can fulfill those roles.

The ruling favors Governor Stein, who is now the plaintiff, by upholding some of his appointment powers and disallowing others, particularly in boards like transportation and public health.

This legal dispute originated from legislation enacted in 2023 and 2024 that shifted appointment powers from the governor to legislative-controlled bodies, with the case escalating after Governor Stein challenged these changes upon taking office.

The ruling largely confirms a similar decision from 2024 and stems from a lawsuit initiated in 2023 by then-Governor Roy Cooper, who criticized the law as a 'legislative power grab' after the legislature overrode his veto.

The case's timing is notable, as it precedes oral arguments in another lawsuit challenging the legislature's law that limits the governor's ability to fill judicial vacancies, scheduled for later the same day.

This decision echoes a 2024 lower court ruling that also split on the issue of appointment powers, reinforcing the ongoing legal debate.

Legislation in question, including Senate Bill 512 and House Bill 488, reduced gubernatorial appointees and expanded appointments by legislative leaders, notably shifting control of the Board of Transportation from a gubernatorial body to a mixed appointment structure.

The case has garnered support from all living former North Carolina governors and opposition from groups like the John Locke Foundation and the North Carolina Institute for Constitutional Law, highlighting the broader constitutional debate over separation of powers.

Legal arguments centered on whether the legislature's appointment changes violated the state constitution, with courts examining the extent of gubernatorial control and legislative authority to create or modify boards.