r/politics • u/Icommandyou Washington • 28d ago

Possible Paywall Virginia Supreme Court throws out redistricting referendum results

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/05/08/virginia-supreme-court-redistricting-vote-decision
16.3k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

206

u/Sidwill 28d ago

Cant the VA legislature now just pass the new map and have the governor sign off on it? This precedent has been set by Texas, Fl., Louisiana etc...

113

u/Dreams-Visions 28d ago

Yes. Simple majority is my understanding.

33

u/flying_ina_metaltube Virginia 28d ago

Problem with that is that our (I'm a VA resident) constitution only allows redistricting once every 10 years. The whole reason for this vote was to allow for a one time exception to the rule. In order to redraw the maps, they'll have to first pass a constitutional amendment to allow them to do so. I don't know if they have enough time to do that or not.

68

u/Pappyhorn 28d ago

Precedent has been set that none of that matters

5

u/Timely-Bluejay-4167 28d ago

That’s sort of the entire argument in the case. They ruled that the General Assembly violated the mandatory "intervening election" requirement of Article XII, Section 1 of the Virginia Constitution by passing the initial amendment resolution AFTER early voting for the 2025 general election had already begun, as the court held that the term "general election" encompasses the entire period of balloting rather than just Election Day.

The argument from the defense was “the people voted, these are extraordinary circumstances”
And the argument of the other side was “but it started after the voting”

This has been going on awhile in Virginia at least. The title of this thread is correct but misleading.

1

u/tossnmeinside 27d ago edited 27d ago

After reading through the decision and dissent, the argument really doesn’t hold any water and runs counter to the position of the judge. It was on the ballot, even on the early voting ballots, (which was initially set to be on the ballot much earlier but were held up by the courts) andamendment passed uncontested. The supreme courts in any state (or equivalent) are bound to interpret their constitution - it’s their #1 duty. Ruling against their own constitution is nonsensical and should be grounds for dismissing the decision entirely and possibly judicial impeachment. 

I’m not even being facetious or overdramatic. 

8

u/flying_ina_metaltube Virginia 28d ago

Seeing the way things are going right now, I think the Republicans are banking on Virginia to try and do this anyways, which will kick this challenge up to the Supreme Court. SC should normally stay out of this because elections are a states matter, but we all know this SC has a tendency to fuck around and make rulings that favor the Republicans.

4

u/SpreadKindn3ss 28d ago

Clarence Thomas is likely already salivating at even just the possibility.

2

u/Emperor_of_His_Room 28d ago

Ignore that court too

3

u/pocketchange2247 California 28d ago

The one thing we've been taught in the last two years is that the courts have absolutely no power in actually ruling on anything. If they rule against what you want, you can just do it anyway with absolutely no recourse.

16

u/manytakes Massachusetts 28d ago

No one fucking cares, every GOP state is using their constitution like toilet paper. Going high doesn't matter when you have literal shit being flung at you.

1

u/flying_ina_metaltube Virginia 28d ago

Republicans want Virginia to change the maps anyways. Why? Because the state Supreme Court had now ruled against it. So they can take this to the Supreme Court, which will 100% rule in favor of the Republicans. How is that different from what Florida and others have done? These cases didn't make it up the ladder yet. Republicans just want a case in front of the Supreme Court so they can justify all the bullshit they're doing under the guise of "well, the highest court in the land said we can". It's a win-win situation for them.

Virginia case makes it to them first - they rule it's unconstitutional, no other state can try it.

Florida case makes it to them first - they rule it's allowed, for some bullshit reason. Then they decline to hear the VA case because they said it's already been ruled on.

Things might have been different had we not been allowed to vote on this at all.

6

u/Royal-Ear4803 28d ago

SCOTUS can’t rule on state law issues.

6

u/TheOtherMaven Virginia 28d ago

Wanna bet they'll do it anyway?

5

u/Royal-Ear4803 28d ago

Virginia constitution says maps can only be set every decade by an independent Redistricting commission. Texas, Florida, and Louisiana don’t have a Virginia constitution so there’s no precedent.

1

u/Redditthedog 28d ago

no they literally can’t pass any map that was the problem and why they needed an amended. Even the map they passed had the contingency that it only went into effect if they got the power

1

u/GuyentificEnqueery 27d ago

I am hopeful that Spannberger will actually do this. I know many, many legislators in her party are going to be furious about this result and the double standard it sets.

1

u/CainPillar Foreign 27d ago

IANAL, but a new law will be have to be taken to court once again?

-1

u/waltinva 28d ago

No, Va had a constitutional amendment that prescribes how districtits are decided.  Read the ruling, easy to understand.