CHARLOTTE - With less than two months to go before the November voting, a federal court heard arguments on whether to prevent new election laws from remaining in effect for the general election.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Charlotte heard the case Thursday.

The American Civil Liberties Union and Southern Coalition for Social Justice are challenging provisions in the law they say place a burden on citizens as they exercise their right to vote. Jeremy Collins, advocacy and policy council for the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, says they consider it a good sign the court wants to take up the law before November.

"We're clearly optimistic," Collins says. "We are enthusiastically preparing for the oral argument and we're excited to place our arguments back before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals."

Provisions in the law that eliminate one week of early voting, end same-day registration, and restrict out-of-precinct voting are being challenged on constitutional grounds.  The number of hours of early voting are the same or not more in some cases, supporters of the law argue. The locations of early voting are also expanded. Critics have charged that some elections boards have designated early voting sites only in places that favored one party over another.

Both parties are asking the court to place the law on hold until next summer, as the courts are expected to hear more detailed arguments on the laws to make a ruling. Collins says if the Fourth Circuit agrees, voting laws would be restored to what they were in the 2012 election.

The proceeding does not impact plans to require all voters to have valid ID to present at the polls, since that provision does not place until the 2016 elections. The Voter ID provision, which in recent polls including one by Elon University has support of upwards of 60 percent of voters, does not take effect until 2016 although a court challenge on that segment of the law could come later.

Supporters of North Carolina's new voting law argue it's needed to combat voter fraud, but Collins and the other plaintiffs disagree.

"It seems as though it's a deliberate attempt to confuse folks and to disenfranchise a considerable population of North Carolinians," he says.

Attorneys for the State of North Carolina argue that changing the voting process this close to the election would be confusing to voters and place an undue burden on the voting system.

Requirements in the new law, according to Collins, are believed to have a disproportionate impact on minorities, low-income voters and college students. A recent analysis by Democracy North Carolina found that 400 provisional ballots cast in the May primary were not counted, but would have been counted under the 2012 laws.

(With information from Stephanie Carson, NC News Service)