In Rockingham County, a fierce political battle has emerged, sparking debates not just over local leadership but also about the future of North Carolina casinos.
At the heart of this controversy is a defamation lawsuit filed by former county commissioner T. Craig Travis against some of his political adversaries. This suit stems from Travis’s narrow loss in the March 2024 Republican primary election for a county commissioner seat.
This news also broke not long after a businessman criticized the North Carolina casino industry. On top of that, one of the state's two tribal casinos recently started Phase 2 of a major renovation and agreed to a deal with an NFL team.
But this latest development is a tale buried deep in local politics and the controversy surrounding potentially transformative casino developments in North Carolina.
The Key Players and Background
T. Craig Travis, who served Rockingham County as a commissioner for 12 years, was looking to make a comeback in 2024. Unfortunately for him, he finished a mere three votes behind incumbent Kevin Berger in a highly competitive primary race that included seven candidates vying for three available seats. Berger, whose father is North Carolina Senate Leader Phil Berger, eventually won re-election in the fall of 2024.
By June 2024, Travis had filed a lawsuit against several individuals and political groups. These defendants included current and former commissioners Kevin Berger, Mark Richardson, and Donald Powell, as well as the Rockingham County GOP Chairwoman Diane Parnell. Additionally, Travis targeted three conservative political groups: the North Carolina Conservatives Fund, Atlas Political Consulting, and GOPAC.
Travis's complaint alleged that these parties had circulated false and damaging statements about him during the election. Among the accusations were that he voted to raise taxes, opposed funding for law enforcement, vandalized or stole campaign signs, and lied about casino development issues. Travis contended that such claims were made to tarnish his reputation, driven by his strong opposition to North Carolina casinos in the county.
North Carolina Casinos, Politics, and Retaliation
The lawsuit does more than just accuse political opponents; it highlights the broader issue of casino development in North Carolina.
Back in 2023, the commissioners, including some named defendants, had supported rezoning and worked with Baltimore-based developer The Cordish Companies on potential North Carolina casinos sites. This even included a controversial site near a children's camp in Stokesdale. Moreover, Phil Berger, alongside other state lawmakers, pushed legislation to approve casinos in counties like Rockingham, although it was blocked in the House.
Travis concluded that these defamatory attacks were a form of retaliation against his anti-casino stance. This notion ties in with another simultaneous lawsuit filed by residents against rezoning for a potential casino, showing the widespread community division over this hotly debated issue in North Carolina regarding casinos.
Courtroom Drama and Resilience
In a dramatic twist, Superior Court Judge Hoyt G. Tessener dismissed Travis's defamation suit in May 2025, ruling that it failed to make valid legal claims.
Travis sought to overturn this dismissal, pointing to the judge's campaign contributions and legislative connections as potential grounds for bias. However, his motion was also denied, prompting him to take the fight to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, where the case is currently pending as of April 2026.
Defendants have vigorously countered his claims, labeling the lawsuit as nothing more than a continuation of Travis's political struggle against casino projects. They argue that the lengthy complaint focused excessively on casino lobbying and not actual defamation.
They describe their involvement as “collateral damage” in a divisive political game and are pushing for the court to dismiss the appeal as frivolous while demanding compensation for legal fees.
The Bigger Picture
This ongoing case encapsulates the tangled relationship between politics, business interests, and personal reputations in the context of North Carolina casinos.
It reflects the broader North Carolina tensions over gambling, particularly as casinos remain a fiercely debated topic. As the lawsuit unfolds in court, judges may have to decide whether the statements in question are protected political speech or cause genuine harm to Travis's reputation.
As Rockingham County watches closely, the outcome of this legal battle could reshape local politics and influence future North Carolina casino initiatives. All eyes are on the North Carolina Court of Appeals to see if this defamation lawsuit will be resolved in Travis’s favor or if it will be seen as a strategic maneuver in political warfare.
