Virginia redistricting certification blocked as judge defies SCOVA
Category: News & Politics
Via: vic-eldred • 7 months ago • 33 commentsBy: Charles Creitz (Fox News)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Virginia's redistricting fight is headed to the state's high court Thursday after a red county judge who previously tried to spurn the "yes" camp threw a wrench into the certification process late Wednesday.
The situation sets up a clash between the judge who halted certification and the state Supreme Court, which allowed the referendum to proceed while challenges remained under review.
Virginia Republicans are urging the courts to take up their challenge to the ballot measure, which voters approved 51%-49% and is expected to redraw the state's congressional districts to give Democrats a 10-1 majority in the House delegation.
GOP officials argue the ballot measure process was illegitimate, and pressure is on to save every Republican-held House seat they can with the U.S. midterm elections fast approaching and the Republican majority in Congress hanging by a thread.
Gov. Abigail Spanberger becomes emotional during the investiture ceremony of Chief Justice Cleo E. Powell in the Supreme Court of Virginia chamber in Richmond March 2, 2026. Powell is the first African-American woman to serve as chief justice of the Virginia Supreme Court.(Mike Kropf/Getty Images)
"[On Tuesday] Virginians saw exactly what happens when a misleading, rigged question is shoved onto the ballot," state Senate Minority Leader Ryan McDougle, R-Hanover, told Fox News Digital. "If this were really about fairness, the advocates wouldn't have needed to blow $90 million-plus to trick voters. Litigation is still pending with the courts, but the bottom line is clear: Virginians deserve far better."
The Supreme Court of Virginia (SCOVA) in March stayed an earlier injunction from Tazewell County Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley Jr., clearing the way for the referendum to advance while making clear it had not ruled on the merits. Hurley ruled again late Wednesday, declaring the ballot language unconstitutional and blocking certification of the results.
A legislative source told Fox News Digital the SCOVA is not likely to play ball on that matter and instead will continue its own litigation of the cases and potentially rebuke Hurley. Still, certification of the election is now paused despite Thursday's SCOVA filing date.
Shortly after the ruling came down, Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones, a Democrat who beat GOP incumbent Jason Miyares in November, indicated his office will "immediately file an appeal."
"As I said last night, Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the people's vote." Jones said in a statement.
Republican Party of Virginia (RPV) Chairman Jeff Ryer told Fox News Digital in an interview Wednesday the party is directly involved in a case before Richmond City Circuit Court that is also challenging the new maps.
According to an RPV statement, that case is titled RNC v. VA State Board of Elections, and a decision on any injunction blocking the new maps is expected next week.
Koski v. RNC and another case, Scott v. McDougle, challenged the allegedly misleading ballot language and procedures that led up to the map redraw and the election itself.
Reps. Morgan Griffith and Ben Cline, R-Va., joined the RNC in its Koski case, which focuses in part on state law requiring an "intervening election" to be held before a referendum can go to voters and argued that early voting having begun before the referendum drafting process started made the vote "void ab initio."
McDougle's case argues lawmakers improperly used an old special session called by then-Gov. Glenn Youngkin to push through the referendum, among other procedural violations, a claim that goes to the heart of whether the process itself was constitutional.
Hurley ruled in McDougle's favor Jan. 27 before SCOVA intervened after a Democrat appeal Feb. 13 to let the election move forward but said it would still review the merits of that case.
Former U.S. Attorney John Fishwick Jr. of the Roanoke-based Western District of Virginia told Fox News Digital the Virginia Supreme Court had issued its postponement hoping that voters would vote "no" and make any necessary legal action moot.
"Now there is white heat on this court, but there are strong arguments that the legislature did not follow its own rules when it passed this proposed amendment," Fishwick said, predicting a "prompt" decision.
Delegate Wren Williams, R-Stuart, an attorney who had favored allowing counties to decline election preparations until SCOVA stayed Hurley's ruling, argued the referendum was illegitimate, and the results should be tossed.
"There are huge constitutional issues with this process to begin with," Williams said in an exclusive interview. "There's a 1952 case where Arlington threw out their own referendum. And in this case, people can say the voters decided all they want, but they didn't decide based on the process that we have in the Constitution."
Williams said a short time before Hurley's ruling that everything is essentially "parked" at SCOVA in Richmond waiting to be consolidated and ruled upon.
Williams said it was clear the election was made to be more about President Donald Trump than Virginia voters.
That assertion would help the case of U.S. Reps. Rob Wittman, R-Va., and John McGuire, R-Va., whose filing challenging Democrats' "to restore fairness" language describing the referendum at the ballot box is being heard.
Ryer said Wittman and McGuire's case has been consolidated into the Koski-RNC case.
Ryer remained optimistic about all cases and pledged that, either way, the RPV will have nominees for all 11 seats, redistricted or not, and called Tuesday's vote an encouraging sign.
"This is the best performance for anything that's been Republican-aligned in the state since the 2021 election, and I think it does demonstrate that Virginia is still a purple state," Ryer said after the results depicted about a 12-point swing to the right from former Lt. Gov. Winsome Sears' loss in November.
House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore, R-Gate City, added that rural Virginia came out strong to try to offset the Washington suburbs.
"We're still fighting. We're still fighting in the courts. We think we're going to win in the courts. The language was so misleading. They didn't follow the statutes they were supposed to follow. There's a lot of missteps that happened during the process. So, we feel comfortable going on to the next phase," he said.
Democrats remained bullish that the election results will stand after Hurley's ruling and court activity commencing at SCOVA Thursday, with Ready for Hillary founder Adam Parkhomenko saying on X, "Virginia voters spoke. MAGA lost. And now a rogue Republican judge is trying to override the will of the people because they didn't like the outcome."
If the cases fail, many redistricting opponents still have faith.
Del. Delores Oates, R-Front Royal, said in a statement that the "YES" crew did not get a "mandate" and that the new 10-1 map may also be a sign.
"Isaiah 10:1 [says] woe to those who make unjust laws; to those who issue oppressive decrees."
"Stop looking at Zillow and start planning for November," Oates said. "We stay and we fight for Virginia."
Tags
Who is online
77 visitors
It isn't a done deal yet.
The Redistricting was illegal
the democratic controlled supreme court will party over the rule of law every time. There is almost zero chance they overturn it.
It's hilarious to watch defenders of Trump, who was the one pushing the redistricting scheme in Republican controlled States in the first place, lose their minds when they see Democrats do the same thing against them. Truly a master class in hypocrisy.
[✘]
Typical partisan response. For the record Trump is the current leader of the Republican party so it stands to reason the leader would call on states to gerrymander. Both parties do this, to call out only one side while giving the other a free pass is a poor way to live.
Gerrymandering has been going on since 1812.
Rather than playing the partisan politics game, why shouldn't we actually do something smarter and rebel against the two political parties. After all, what gerrymandering actually does is remove power from the people to choose and gain the political representation they actually want. To cheer for gerrymandering is about the same as cheering for the MBA's who decide how our healthcare system works.
Exactly. Politics is becoming more like a game to crush the other team and less like choosing the best people to represent you. There has to be a better way to draw congressional districts. Give chat GPT a shot at it, it can't do any worse.
Who is cheering for gerrymandering? I was sarcastically applauding Republicans for creating this fucking mess but apparently, I wasn't sarcastic enough. It is funny to see all the hyperventilating responses though.
[✘]
Yea. Dems just started doing it because of trump
He did not argue that the Dems just now started gerrymandering.
He argued that the current push by the Ds to gerrymander mid-census was in direct response (fighting fire with fire) to Trump's drive to fabricate seats by gerrymandering mid-census.
First , the notion that Ds gerrymander mid-census is not an excuse for Trump's actions.
Second , the mid-census gerrymandering over the last 30 years has not been predominantly by the Ds. In fact, over the past 30 years (excluding the response to the Texas gerrymandering), the Ds have done this 0 times. The Rs have done it 2 times.
With Trump, the Rs have done it three more times and the Ds have now done it in response.
ChatGPT chronicle of incidents during the three decades before this Trump-instigated mid-census gerrymandering:
But because of Trump, we add in 2025 and 2026 3 more incidents by the Rs (Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina) and two by the Ds (California, Virginia).
Why do you try to defend the corruption of Trump?
Nobody quite does it to the extreme as democrats have. There are blue states that can't be gerrymandered any more than they are.
You are expressing feelings rather than facts. You ignored my post and the subtopic.
The subtopic is mid-census gerrymandering.
My post shows factually that Trump initiated a rare mid-census gerrymandering. Even though rare, Rs lead the charge in this area.
But it really does not matter who is doing it; gerrymandering (especially mid-census) is partisan crap that violates the principle of democracy, and Trump started yet another shitstorm.
Trump is unfit. Support for him is irrational, irresponsible, and unpatriotic.
Both parties are guilty of it and will continue to do it where they see it will give them the advantage until it is no longer working. Of course no one is going to make it illegal since they are all happy to wait until it will give them an advantage. You can't blame any one person or party, as long as it is legal the parties will continue to do it.
Everyone knows that. So, you are now saying the ends do not justify the means.
It's about time.
As you often do, you put forth a simplistic and wrong interpretation of what I wrote.
I am saying that the Ds had little choice but to fight fire with fire. Neither party should ever gerrymander because it is wrong. But in this case, the only real recourse to nullify the Rs wrongful mid-census gerrymandering is for the Ds to also engage in wrongful mid-census gerrymandering.
Such utter bullshit. You should go by what I write, not by the words you try to put into my mouth.
I'm all for that!
I am not.
The districts (and thus the representation) should be defined based on population density, not partisan politics. It should be a democratic, not a political determination.
But you want fighting with fire when the dems face redistricting.
Got it.
Again, you totally misrepresent what I wrote.
Instead of dealing honestly in debate, you yet again post strawman crap.
No, I never want to see gerrymandering. It sucks that this was the only viable option to neutralize Trump's gerrymandering. The fact that the Ds basically had no choice does not in any way mean that I want to see this crap happen.
I realize that, given your irrational support for Trump, you have a compromised foundation for arguments. But that is no justification for dishonesty.
The signature of a dishonest post.
Oh dear, maybe someday I'll finally understand what you mean.
The next step would then be to represent it honestly.
Forgive me if I'm not surprised.
You may be right, but let us not forget Republicans still have one huge card to play: the state of Florida.
Republicans, as we saw with Indiana, are not as ruthlessly partisan and extreme as democrats. They don’t vote as a bloc.
If they don't they get threatened to be primaried.
The Supreme Court has already ruled in favor of the state's rights to political based redistricting! What's good for Texas is good for all...
I would rather have it good for no one
Correct. Redistricting should be done based on the census to evenly distribute districts across a state in terms of population density. Partisan politics should never enter into the equation.
And this current mess is a result of Trump pushing Texas to try to find 5 new seats by a pre-census gerrymander. While sensible people oppose this practice, the Ds had no other means of fighting this other than to engage in fire vs fire. More damage precipitated by the corrupt, irresponsible PotUS.
I wish it were so. Sadly, even the US Census has recently shown signs of partisanship.
SCOTUS ruled that federal courts cannot review claims of partisan gerrymandering. State courts however can and there are four cases with the state courts, one has been ruled on and the Virgina AG has stated he will appeal that ruling.
I would rather that we did not have gerrymandering at all but as the political parties have so much power the politicians are in lockstep with the demands of their respective parties. All to the disadvantage of the people.
"What's good for Texas is good for all."
OK, Virginia must then accept Texas gun laws and 85 speed limit and allow use of Radar detectors
aka hypocrites
These people were so excited about redistricting mid-decade. Until Democrats started doing it, too.
Virginia GOP's problems started with weak candidates for Governor and LT Gov and very poor campaign strategy and execution and some overconfidence.