Judge blocks parts of North Carolina voting law that all other states already ban?

So today a judge blocked parts of the New North Carolina voting laws.  These laws were already in place in the primary elections.  This judge cited the possibility of disenfranchising minority voters as the reason. 

First of all the statistics are already in on the primary elections and here is what they found.  There were more minority voters in the last primary election then there were in the primary election 4 years ago.  They have proof that there was no disenfranchising of minority voters.

Second the parts of the law that were blocked were already in effect in the majority of other states.  What parts were blocked.  The law outlawed same day registration in early voting.  In most of the other 49 states you are required to vote at least 30 days prior to the election.  This part of the North Carolina law was blocked for the current November election.  The North Carolina law also disallowed people from voting in a district they were not registered in.  I do not know of any other state that allows people to vote any place other than their precinct with the exception of absentee ballots.  This was also blocked.

I'm not sure exactly why this judge felt that North Carolina needed voting laws more lax than any other state of the union.  The parts of the law that are under debate (the part that required a valid government issued picture ID)were allowed to continue, but the parts where most of the other states agree with were blocked.  Does this make any sense to anyone?

It just goes to show just how far activist judges will go to get their agenda across.