The judges said that in his advisory role, Stanford University law professor Nathaniel Persily provided valuable insight that helped them decide remaining issues in the case.

“The special master’s work was helpful to the court, and his fees are very reasonable, especially considering the detailed work he did on a short schedule,” the trio of judges wrote in their eight-page order.

But Persily’s bill is just the start: Lawyers for voters behind the successful, gerrymandering suit want an additional $1.5 million from state taxpayers for their three years of effort in the case.

“Plaintffs prevailed in what this court has described as ‘one of the most widespread racial gerrymanders ever held unconstitutional by a federal court ...’ “ Raleigh lawyer Edwin Speas Jr. said in court papers, referring to his side’s accomplishment.

The private lawyers represented 31 voters from across the state who sued successfully to overturn what they claimed were gerrymandered election districts for state House and Senate seats.

In contrast, Persily worked for the trio of judges — U.S. District Judges Catherine Eagles of Greensboro and Thomas Schroeder of Winston-Salem, and Circuit Judge James Wynn Jr., of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — who initially decided the case in favor of those protesting voters.

The judicial panel hired Persily in late October after determining that state legislators failed last summer to completely fix the unconstitutional gerrymandering intended to enhance Republican prospects at the ballot box.

Earlier, lawyers for the voters had argued successfully that after the 2010 census, legislators packed 28 state House and Senate districts with excessive numbers of black voters to blunt the larger impact of their voting patterns that tend to favor Democratic candidates. Also before Persily came on board, the nation’s highest court upheld the three-judge panel’s original gerrymander decision and the General Assembly took another stab last August at redistricting fairly.

The trio of judges hired Persily in late October to suggest ways to fix nine districts still in dispute after the General Assembly’s second try. The Stanford University expert in election law came up with a plan largely adopted by the judges, one that made significant changes to several state House and Senate districts in Guilford County.

Lawyers for the legislative defendants contended in recent court documents that North Carolina taxpayers should not have to shoulder all of Persily’s bill. Legislative defendants include state Senate Leader Phil Berger (R-Eden), state House Speaker Tim Moore (R-Kings Mountain), as well as other current and former GOP legislators. Other defendants in the case are state government in general and the state Board of Elections, along with several of its board members.

Lawyers for Berger, Moore and the other legislative defendants argued against paying Persily’s tab in full. They contended that his services really weren’t needed, that the complaining voters should pay some of his charges and that the bill should only be assessed against state government on an “interim” basis because the legislative defendants might win a renewed appeal they have made to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In their order signed Thursday, Wynn, Schroeder and Eagles said those arguments were without merit. The judges praised Persily’s expertise, noting that “the matters at issue in this case have a high degree of public importance.”

Unlike Persily’s request for payment, the fees submitted by Speas and other lawyers representing the voters might be questioned by North Carolina Attorney General's offce. The court file contains a statement that the plaintiffs’ lawyers met March 9 with attorneys from the office but “were unable to reach an agreement.”

In their request, Speas’ law firm is seeking about $814,000 in attorneys’ fees and expenses, and the Durham-based Southern Coalition for Social Justice wants just less than $675,000. Prominent civil-rights lawyer Adam Stein of Chapel Hill, father of North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein, also worked on the plaintiffs’ side of the case and is seeking $35,650 in attorneys’ fees.

The elder Stein withdrew from the case in late 2016 after his son was elected to the statewide office. The younger Stein also has recused himself from involvement in the case and delegated it to a deputy attorney general, his office said Wednesday. 

As of Dec. 31, the General Assembly had spent $5.6 million on legal fees and other charges stemming from 11 lawsuits challenging various aspects of redistricting. Legislators redistrict after the census every 10 years, modifying election districts for a variety of state and federal offices to account for changes in population.

This story has been updated to reflect that N.C. Attorney General Josh Stein has also recused himself from involvement in the case.