Share and Follow
In a significant blow to the Democratic Party, the Virginia Supreme Court nullified a voter-endorsed plan for redrawing congressional districts on Friday. This decision is another hurdle for Democrats in their ongoing nationwide struggle with Republicans for a strategic advantage in the upcoming midterm elections.
The court, in a narrow 4-3 decision, determined that the Democratic-controlled state legislature did not adhere to procedural rules when it enabled a constitutional amendment for redistricting to be placed on the ballot. Although voters approved this amendment on April 21, the court’s judgment effectively invalidates the outcome of that vote.
Justice D. Arthur Kelsey, authoring the majority opinion, criticized the manner in which the legislature presented the amendment to the electorate, describing it as “unprecedented.”
“This breach fundamentally compromises the integrity of the referendum process, rendering its results void,” Kelsey asserted.
Democrats had anticipated that the revised map could help them gain up to four additional U.S. House seats, aiming to counteract redistricting efforts by Republicans encouraged by former President Donald Trump. In response to the ruling, Virginia Democrats announced plans to seek an emergency appeal of the decision from the U.S. Supreme Court later on Friday.
Friday’s ruling, combined with a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that severely weakened the Voting Rights Act, has supercharged Republicans’ congressional gerrymandering advantage heading into this year’s midterm elections.
“Huge win for the Republican Party, and America, in Virginia,” Trump said about the decision on his social media account.
Richard Hudson, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said the ruling was another sign of GOP momentum heading into the midterms.
“We’re on offense, and we’re going to win,” he said in a statement.
Don Scott, the Democratic speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates, said Democrats respect the court’s opinion but lamented that it overturned the will of the voters: “They voted YES because they wanted to fight back against the Trump power grab.”
Suzan DelBene, chairwoman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, criticized the court majority for what she said was a decision that “cast aside the will of the voters,” but she said the people will have the final say.
“In November, they will, and they’ll power Democrats to the House majority,” she said in a statement.
A longshot Democratic appeal
Democrats are taking a legal longshot in asking the nation’s highest court to reverse the Virginia ruling. The U.S. Supreme Court tries to avoid second-guessing state courts’ interpretations of their own constitutions. In 2023, it turned down a request by North Carolina Republicans to overrule a state Supreme Court decision that blocked the GOP’s congressional map.
Still, even an unsuccessful appeal would let Democrats try to blame their failure on the conservative majority that dominates the nation’s highest court, which has already infuriated the party and civil rights groups by neutering the Voting Rights Act.
Legislative voting districts typically are redrawn once a decade after each census to account for population changes. But Trump sparked an unusual flurry of mid-decade redistricting last year by encouraging Republican officials in Texas to redraw districts in a bid to win several additional U.S. House seats and hold on to their party’s narrow majority in the midterm elections.
California responded with new voter-approved districts drawn to Democrats’ advantage, and Utah’s top court imposed a new congressional map that also helps Democrats. Meanwhile, Republicans stand to gain from new House districts passed in Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio and Tennessee. They could add even more after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the Voting Rights Act case, which has prompted some other Republican states to consider redrawing their maps in time for this year’s elections.
Virginia is currently represented in the U.S. House by six Democrats and five Republicans, all elected from districts imposed by a court following a bipartisan redistricting commission’s failure to agree on a map after the 2020 census. The new districts could have given Democrats an improved chance to win all but one of the state’s 11 congressional seats.
The state Supreme Court’s majority was critical of the state’s redrawing of the congressional maps to benefit one political party. Those justices noted that 47% of the state’s voters supported GOP congressional candidates in 2024, but the new map could result in Democrats making up 91% of the state’s House delegation.
What was in the Democrats’ map
Under the Democratic-drawn map, five districts would have been anchored in the Democratic stronghold of northern Virginia. Revisions to four other districts across Richmond, southern Virginia and Hampton Roads would have diluted the voting power of conservative blocs in those areas. And a reshaped district in parts of western Virginia would have lumped together three Democratic-leaning college towns to offset other Republican voters.
The state Supreme Court’s seven justices are appointed by the state legislature, which has toggled back and forth between Democratic, Republican and split control over recent years. Legal experts say the body doesn’t have a set ideological profile.
The case before the court focused not on the shape of the new districts but rather on the process the General Assembly used to authorize them.
Because the state’s redistricting commission was established by a voter-approved constitutional amendment, lawmakers had to propose an amendment to redraw the districts. That required approval of a resolution in two separate legislative sessions, with a state election sandwiched in between, to place the amendment on the ballot.
The legislature’s initial approval of the amendment occurred last October, during early voting for the general election, before it concluded. The legislature’s second vote on the amendment occurred after a new legislative session began in January. Lawmakers also approved a separate bill in February laying out the new districts, subject to voter approval of the constitutional amendment.
Arguments over the definition of ‘election’
Judicial arguments focused on whether the legislature’s initial approval of the amendment came too late, because early voting already had begun.
Attorney Matthew Seligman, who defended the legislature, argued that the “election” should be defined narrowly to mean the Tuesday of the general election. In that case, the legislature’s first vote on the redistricting amendment occurred before the election and was constitutional, he told judges.
But in its ruling, the Supreme Court said, “this view appears to be wholly unprecedented in Virginia’s history.”
An attorney for the plaintiffs, Thomas McCarthy, argued an “election” should be interpreted to cover the entire period during which voters can cast ballots, which lasts several weeks in Virginia. If that’s the case, he told justices, then the legislature’s initial endorsement of the redistricting amendment came too late to comply with the state constitution.
The Supreme Court agreed with that argument, writing: “The General Assembly passed the proposed constitutional amendment for the first time well after voters had begun casting ballots during the 2025 general election.”
By the time lawmakers initially endorsed the amendment, voters already had cast more than 1.3 million ballots in the general election, about 40% of the total votes ultimately cast, the court said.
The Supreme Court’s ruling affirms a decision by a judge in rural Tazewell County, in southwestern Virginia. The court had placed a hold on that ruling and allowed the redistricting vote to proceed before hearing arguments on the case.
In the dissent to Friday’s ruling, Chief Justice Cleo Powell said the election for the purpose of considering the amendment does not include the early voting period.
“The majority’s definition creates an infinite voting loop that appears to have no established beginning,” she wrote, “only a definitive end: Election Day.”