A new legislative proposal by Virginia Democrats has ignited a debate over the potential elimination of mandatory minimum sentences for a range of violent felonies. This comes shortly after Democratic Governor Abigail Spanberger took office, signaling a swift move towards altering the state’s criminal justice policies.

In the wake of Gov. Spanberger’s inauguration, Democratic lawmakers have introduced several amendments aimed at dismantling mandatory minimum sentences for crimes such as manslaughter, rape, child pornography possession and distribution, and assaulting law enforcement officers. The proposed changes extend to repeat violent felonies as well, presenting a significant shift in how Virginia might handle such offenses in the future.

Jason Miyares, the former Republican attorney general, has highlighted House Bill 863 as a pivotal piece of this legislative push. He warns that the bill’s passage could lead to the removal of established sentencing guidelines intended for serious crimes, potentially altering the judicial landscape.

Moreover, the proposed legislation seeks to eliminate the mandatory five-day minimum sentence for certain first-time DUI offenders, further underscoring the Democrats’ intent to reform sentencing laws across the board.

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger, during her inaugural ceremony at the Capitol in Richmond, was accompanied by House Speaker Don Scott, D-Portsmouth, as these discussions began to take shape. This move reflects the ongoing conversation about balancing justice reform with public safety considerations in the state.

“HB 863 is a common-sense proposal that eliminates the requirement for one-size-fits-all minimum sentences for certain crimes,” Delegate Rae Cousins, who sponsored the bill, said, according to ABC 7. 

“This change would give the experienced judges in our communities more discretion to make decisions based on the unique facts of each case. As the General Assembly session continues, I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation and promote fairer outcomes in our justice system.”

If passed, HB 863 would eliminate minimum sentencing for manslaughter, rape, possession and distribution of child pornography, assaulting a law enforcement officer and other repeat violent felonies. (iStock)

However, law enforcement experts are pushing back against the bill while expressing concerns about how the possibility of more lenient sentencing could impact victims of violent crimes.

“From a law enforcement standpoint, I think police generally want offenders to be held accountable, and frustration among law enforcement officers grows when individuals are released quickly and subsequently re-offend – and even more so if it involved a violent felony,” law enforcement expert Josh Ederheimer told Fox News Digital. I think that also tracks the thinking of many members of the public.  I think there is more tolerance for flexibility for minor offenses. 

Virginia Beach police respond to a shooting on Saturday, Feb. 22, 2025, in Virginia Beach, Va.  (Stephen M. Katz/The Virginian-Pilot via AP)

Ederheimer, an assistant professor at the University of Virginia’s Center for Public Safety and Justice and a retired law enforcement officer, went on to explain that police typically understand unique circumstances that can point to a defendant receiving a lesser sentence, but frustration still exists surrounding more serious crimes.

“For violent felonies, however, the biggest practical concern is that the defendant will re-offend, and that the public is not alerted or aware that the defendant has returned to the community. It’s an accountability concern that falls on the shoulders of judges and prosecutors.”

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger signs executive orders after being sworn into office at the Virginia State Capitol January 17, 2026, in Richmond, Virginia.  (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

The proposed bill would allow courts to hand down sentences based on the individual facts of each case, rather than statutory mandates implemented by the state’s government. However, it does not impact maximum penalties in such cases. 

Ederheimer further explained that the bill could have a negative impact on victims and their families regarding accountability for violent offenders. 

“I think that the police and public alike have expectations that convicted criminals will be held accountable, and that full sentences should be served,” Ederheimer said. “Mandatory minimums assure victims – and the community – that a convicted person will serve their sentence.”  

Virginia state police officers stand in the parking lot after a mass shooting at a Walmart in Chesapeake, Virginia, U.S. November 23, 2022. (REUTERS/Jay Paul)

“It is the circumstance when convicted felons are released early that victims may feel a sense of betrayal or that justice was not served. That’s the dilemma.”

The bill is set to be reviewed by the House and Senate Justice Committees, where it will likely be amended.

However, Ederheimer added that mandatory minimum sentences may not actually encourage violent offenders not to commit crimes, further adding to the complex balance of maintaining justice and community safety. 

“From a law enforcement perspective, I don’t think mandatory minimums serve as a deterrent,” Ederheimer told Fox News Digital. “I think that largely defendants are not focused on repercussions at the time of their offense.”