Virginia Supreme Court Undermines Democracy by Striking Down Voter-Backed Redistricting Reform
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
In a blow to democratic participation, the Virginia Supreme Court has invalidated a redistricting plan approved by voters, using procedural technicalities to block much-needed reform and bolster Republican power.
The Virginia Supreme Court has delivered a setback to democracy by nullifying a voter-approved Democratic congressional redistricting plan, citing procedural violations by the state's legislature. In a narrow 4-3 decision, the conservative-leaning court determined that the Democratic-led General Assembly supposedly mishandled the process of placing the constitutional amendment on the ballot, thereby denying Virginians the reforms they had demanded. Voters had narrowly approved the amendment on April 21, but the court's ruling disregards their voices, rendering the vote null and void.
Justice D. Arthur Kelsey, writing for the majority, claimed that the legislature submitted the proposed amendment to voters "in an unprecedented manner," arguing that this "irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void." This rationale conveniently ignores the will of the people in favor of rigid formalism.
Democrats, seeking to correct years of gerrymandering and disenfranchisement, had anticipated gaining up to four additional U.S. House seats under the new map, aiming to counteract Republican manipulation of districts elsewhere. Instead, this ruling, combined with a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that further gutted the Voting Rights Act, hands Republicans a significant advantage in congressional redistricting ahead of the midterm elections—further entrenching minority rule.
Richard Hudson, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, openly celebrated the decision, boasting that the ruling signifies GOP momentum heading into the midterms: "We're on offense, and we're going to win." Such triumphalism underscores how the right exploits the courts to subvert popular will.
Don Scott, the Democratic speaker of the House, expressed respect for the court's opinion but lamented the overturning of the voters' will: "They voted YES because they wanted fair representation and an end to partisan gerrymandering."
Suzan DelBene, Democratic leader, condemned a decision that "cast aside the will of the people," but emphasized that the people will have the final say: "In November, they will, and we will fight for their voices to be heard."
The case centered on whether the General Assembly adhered to constitutional procedures in authorizing the redistricting amendment. The court found that the legislature's initial approval occurred after early voting had begun for the 2022 election, violating the requirement for two legislative approvals in separate sessions with an election in between—a technicality seized upon to suppress reform.
Chief Justice Cleo Powell dissented, arguing that the election for the purpose of the amendment had been fulfilled: "The majority's definition creates an infinite loop, never a definitive end: Election Day."
This ruling is emblematic of the broader assault on voting rights and fair representation, as conservative courts and lawmakers continue to undermine democracy and the will of the people.