Virginia Supremes Strike Down Voter-Approved Gerrymander
A significant blow to Democrats.
NYT (“In Huge Blow to Democrats, Virginia Court Strikes Down House Map“):
The Virginia Supreme Court on Friday struck down a measure allowing state Democrats to redraw congressional districts, dealing a significant blow to the party’s efforts to keep pace with Republicans in a nationwide redistricting battle.
The ruling wipes out four Democratic-leaning U.S. House seats in Virginia and means that Republicans will enter the midterms with a structural advantage from their moves to carve out newly red districts across the country.
In the Virginia court’s 4-to-3 decision, the majority wrote that Democratic legislators had put a constitutional amendment to allow for a new map before voters in “an unprecedented manner” that violated the state’s constitution, adding, “This violation irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void.”
[…]
In Virginia, voters approved the amendment in a statewide referendum by about three percentage points, according to the most recent tally, after the General Assembly had passed it twice. But Republicans challenged nearly every aspect of the process. Most of these lawsuits were filed before in a county court in the rural southwestern corner of the state, where a judge repeatedly ruled in the Republicans’ favor. These rulings were appealed to the State Supreme Court.
[…]
In lawsuits, Republicans argued that the language in the amendment was misleading, that the new districts were not drawn compactly, that it was improper to vote on redistricting at a legislative session that had convened to discuss budget issues and that a state law required county clerks to post notices about the amendment months before it was actually voted on.
One of the most critical questions concerned the sequence of events in Virginia’s complex amendment process. Before voters weigh in on an amendment to the State Constitution, the General Assembly must approve it twice, with an election for the state House of Delegates taking place between the two votes. The first vote for this amendment was on Oct. 31, just days before the state election. With hundreds of thousands of Virginians having already voted, Republicans argued that the legislative action had come too late.
The court sided with that argument.
“Early Virginia voters unknowingly forfeited their constitutionally protected opportunity to vote for or against delegates who favor or disfavor amending the Constitution by not anticipating a legislative vote on a constitutional amendment four days before the last day of voting,” the court’s majority wrote in its ruling.
But the loss in Virginia is likely to only further stoke more redistricting battles. Already, Democrats in New York and Colorado have signaled a desire to try and redraw their maps before the 2028 elections, and Virginia Democrats are likely to be in a similar position, since the court mainly took issue with the process, not with the resulting map.
The irony here is that efforts by Democrats going back years to make elections more (small-d) democratic have undermined their efforts to fight fire with fire in the gerrymandering wars. Virginians amended our constitution years ago to have our Congressional districts drawn by a nonpartisan commission. So, to fight back against Texas’ and other red states’ gerrymander with a gerrymander of our own required amending the Commonwealth’s constitution to allow it. But we also allow voting in all of our elections to stretch for weeks, in an effort to maximize the opportunity for Virginians to make their voice heard. Alas, that made it harder to quickly get the constitutional amendment on the ballot.
The outcome here is legally correct. Taken in a vacuum, it’s also a blow for democracy and the rule of law. Alas, in the context of Republican legislatures elsewhere—at the behest of the Republican President of the United States—to stack the midterm deck in their favor, it creates an uneven playing field.
It’s also notable that the requirement of a case in controversy to obtain a binding judicial ruling can be a major problem in our system. Some $100 million was spent on this effort. 3.1 million people showed up to vote. Volunteer election officials spent untold manhours working the polls. Schools were closed throughout the state for the day, with all the ancillary childcare impacts. All for naught.
UPDATE/ADDENDUM by SLT
James beat me to this post by a few minutes, so I took mine down, but will share this:
I have three thoughts.
- I still think that the national political environment favors Dems taking the House, but this is a blow to that goal, given the other gerrymandering being done in red states.
- This kind of decision is going to deepen a lot of frustration that national politics is (and I hate to even use the word since it has been so demeaned by the sitting president), rigged against Democrats. I cannot speak to the legal reasoning in the case, but on the fact of it is frustrating to see Louisiana just suspend primaries, or watch Tennessee redistrict in a few days, or for Florida to do so seemingly in violation of its state constitution, and yet Virginia consults its voters and is told “nope!”
- All of this is profoundly deepening my frustration with a system that privileges lines on a map over the will of voters.
As Dr. Joyner hints at noting blue state anti-gerrymandering law, Dems helped rig it against themselves being too goody-goody and nicey-nice.
One Dem argument for Obama over Hillary in 2008 was his supposedly “post-partisan” palatabilty compared to her scorched earth partisanship. Even as a McCain teen back then, I found it ridiculous Dems would eschew a candidate for not placating her enemies. Rightwing hatred of Hillary should’ve been seen as a strength — as it was for FDR.
But that’s New Deal Dem mindset. Many modern libs care more about performative self-flagellation than crushing the opposition. Like the dumb calls to release the DNC’s 2024 autopsy (it’s 2026 now, who cares?) or like usually smart folks going stupid in 2024 with “Uncommitted,” “Genocide Joe,” “Fk Joe Biden,” and “I live in a safe blue state, so I’m gonna vote 3rd party to send a message.” Then when told that projecting intraparty unenthusiasm is defeatist, it’s “But we’re not Republicans, we don’t blindly follow.”
Okay well, they’re in power because Republicans do blindly follow when necessary to win; they’re not gonna lose to prove a point about their righteousness. In an election year, it’s win first, then do the other stuff (infighting, purity tests, moral preening) after.
Hence why Tennessee, Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana are moving on gerrymandering while blue Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, Maryland, and New York sat around handwringing despite valiant pressure from Rep. Jeffries.
Those opposed to Newsom 2028 are gonna have a tough ride. He and Spanberger will benefit from responding forcefully and as quickly as possible while others dithered. Too bad Hillary is too damaged to run again, while Warren’s moment has probably passed. Warren understands power — correctly urging Biden to stop the incremental foot dragging and just unilaterally cancel most/all student debt. But of course Warren opposes Dems’ self-imposed goody-two-shoes handicap: she’s a former Republican.
@DK:
The outlier is Indiana, which valiantly resisted Trump’s pressures. Several Republican reps were successfully primaried Tuesday as a reward.
I think at this point, Republicans may be underestimating Democratic rage at this behavior.
I guess we’ll see in November, but I think the mid-cycle redistricting and the Republican shenanigans that have accompanied it may bolster turnout.
Democratic voters’ rights are being stripped away from them.
It’s difficult to overstate how much respect I’ve lost for Republicans. All of them.
@DK:
Well, they’ll also be 80 and 78 respectively in 2028. We need younger blood.
@Jen:
This is the thing I keep returning to. If the GOP manages to gerrymander themselves into a position where they get 40% of the vote and a majority of House seats or disenfranchises enough peoople, I don’t think anyone is obligated to see actions by that Congress as legitimate. Bury them in lawsuits and refuse to comply.
@Hal 10000:
Speak for yourself, I need experienced, wise, dedicated fighters.
The youth obssession and ageism on the left amuses me to no end. What is it based on? Certainly not on outcomes.
The best president of my lifetime was an octogenarian. The Trumpiest generation in exit poling are Xers, not Boomers. The politics of Gen Z men in particular have been all over the map, trainwreck esque. Do people yearn for fewer Bernies and Pelosis and more Claviculars and Nick Fuenti?
Explain it to me like I’m five, because I’m looking at the political activity of those to 10-15 years younger than I — and I’m still fairly youthful — and not seeing why “Because Younger” is a valid rejoinder, or what indicates relative youth is any great balm for America’s issues.
Maybe it’s cultural; I know the old comedic trope about how quickly yts throw their elders into nursing homes yuk yuk
America could be heading for an election in which Democrats win an overwhelming proportion of the national popular vote – 55-45% or similar – but Republicans keep their majorities in Congress.
Alternatively, Democrats might win bare majorities in both chambers, or just the House, prompting even more determined gerrymandering in red states leading up to 2028.
Neither scenario will do anything to resolve America’s continuing descent into dysfunctional governance and lapsed democracy.
The fascinating results of the British elections:
In an electoral system consisting of single districts where the candidate with the most votes wins no matter whether they have an absolute majority, such divided support for five different parties is going to keep producing wildly arbitrary results which leave the majority of voters feeling unrepresented. We saw this in 2024 when Labour won a massive majority in the House with less than 34% of the vote. Now Reform has won a whole bunch of local council seats plus seats in the Scottish and Welsh legislatures with only 26% of the vote.
I don’t know how long such a system can persist without triggering widespread social unrest. Hopefully the Brits will be sensible enough either to adopt ranked choice voting, or to increase the size of districts and introduce proportional representation.
@DK: “Too bad Hillary is too damaged to run again, while Warren’s moment has probably passed. ”
Also, Hillary is 78 and Warren is 76. Both of them seem infinitely more alert and youthful than either Trump or Biden, but as much as I admire both women, I don’t want a Democratic candidate pushing 80 in 2028.
@Jen: “I think at this point, Republicans may be underestimating Democratic rage at this behavior.”
My sense is that the a handful of right-wing judges overturning an election on the most dubious of technical grounds is finally going to sweep away most of the inherent Democratic resistance to serious judicial reforms. And if it doesn’t, the upcoming Florida decision that will undoubtedly ignore the plain language of the state’s constitution to all Republicans to gerrymander will.
@DK: “The best president of my lifetime was an octogenarian.”
Maybe I’m confused, but do you mean Ronald Reagan? The same Ronald Reagan who was visibly slipping into senility in his second term? Oh, and the same Ronald Reagan who started the move towards transferring the wealth of this nation from the middle and lower classes to the super rich? That Ronald Reagan? The best president of your lifetime?
Maybe I’m forgetting someone. Maybe you’re being ironic. Whatever. I do like your plural for Nick Fuentas, anyway.
@wr:
Apparently cognitive issues are not limited just to our elders.
An octogenarian is a person between 80 and 89 years old. Reagan was in his 70s during his presidency. Joe Biden vacated the presidency last year, at age 82.
Youth can breed arrogance in those not wise enough to have intellectual humility, and we see again and again — here and elsewhere — that a younger brain is not necessarily all it’s cracked up to be. Ageist bigotry is sadly normalized among certain demographics, but this thirtysomething is more concerned about Americans and political figures pushing 30 and pushing 60 than about Hillary Clinton or Liz Warren. Far more.
@DK: Sorry about that. I think I just skipped right over the last couple of presidents. And honestly, it’s so rare to hear anyone say anything nice about Biden these days — although he did do some really good things along the way — that he never crossed my mind. Apologies to you and Unca Joe!