Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-248_4fc5.pdf
Page Number: 12.0

8 

BERGER v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE 
CONFERENCE OF THE NAACP 
Opinion of the Court 

could  not  overcome  a  “heightened  presumption”  that  the 
Board  already  “adequately  represented”  their  interests. 
999 F. 3d 915, 927, 932–934 (2021).  Six judges dissented.
Among other things, the dissenters suggested that the ma-
jority  had  erred  by  “ignor[ing]  North  Carolina’s  law  re-
questing two agents in cases challenging the constitution-
ality of its duly-enacted statutes” and by “setting the bar for 
the  Intervenors  to  clear  too  high.”  Id.,  at  945  (opinion  of 
Quattlebaum, J.); see also id., at 939 (opinion of Wilkinson,
J.); id., at 941 (opinion of Niemeyer, J.). 

The  legislative  leaders  responded  by  petitioning  this 
Court  to  review  the  Fourth  Circuit’s  en  banc  ruling.    We 
agreed to hear the matter in order to resolve disagreements 
among the circuits about the proper treatment of motions 
to intervene in cases like this one.  595 U. S. ___ (2021). 

II 
Our  starting  point  lies  in  Rule  24(a)(2)  of  the  Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure.  As relevant here, the Rule pro-
vides that a “court must permit anyone to intervene” who,
(1) “[o]n timely motion,” (2) “claims an interest relating to
the property or transaction that is the subject of the action,
and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a prac-
tical matter impair or impede the movant’s ability to protect 
its interest,” (3) “unless existing parties adequately repre-
sent that interest.”  Everyone before us agrees that the leg-
islative leaders’ motion to intervene was timely.  The only
disagreements we face concern the Rule’s two remaining re-
quirements. 

A 
We  focus  first  on  the  question  whether  the  legislative
leaders  have  claimed  an  interest  in  the  resolution  of  this 
lawsuit that may be practically impaired or impeded with-
out their participation.  No one questions that States pos-
sess “ ‘a legitimate interest in the continued enforce[ment]