But appealing it would either force the supreme court to side with the gerrymandering. Or rule against it and give fodder for the plaintiffs in the southern states.

apparently the same situation but without support of the voters, what will Florida Supreme court do?

My bet is in favor of DeSantis partisan gerrymandering.

Partisan vs race, both are wrong in a so called democracy.

Even if they don't outright rule for DeSantis, they'll find some reason to delay while leaving the current gerrymander in place.

Article XII Section 1 does it violate ?

🤔


✌🏻

The change championed by referendum itself does not violate the VA constitution, it was that the required process was not followed (supposedly).

A proposed amendment must pass the general assembly twice, with an intervening election between the two.

The reasoning for striking it down is that since the first vote occurred during the VA early voting window had started already when the first vote was conducted, and that this means there had not been an entire intervening election in-between the two.

I get and acknowledge the technicality, but at the same time, saying that this 'incurably taints' the election seems like bullshit.

The redistricting battle began on Oct. 27, just days before the Nov. 4 state elections, when Democratic lawmakers introduced a constitutional amendment during a special session of the General Assembly that would allow congressional districts to be redrawn outside of the once-in-a-decade redistricting cycle tied to the census.

The proposal immediately sparked partisan fights over both the timing of the amendment and Democrats’ push to redraw Virginia’s congressional map ahead of the midterms.

The House advanced the proposal the next day, and the Senate approved it on Oct. 31 along party lines, pushing it forward as required by the multi-step constitutional process, which required the amendment to pass again in a subsequent session.

When lawmakers returned to Richmond in January, they approved the legislation a second time, but the measure soon became entangled in legal challenges.

After Hurley first ruled the amendment invalid, the Supreme Court of Virginia intervened, allowing the referendum to proceed despite the lower court ruling. At the time, justices made clear they were not resolving the broader legal questions, only ensuring that voters would have the opportunity to weigh in.

The court’s earlier decision to allow the referendum onto the ballot led many legal observers to believe the amendment would likely survive if voters approved it.
—————————-

The voters approved it by roughly 3%

https://virginiamercury.com/2026/05/08/supreme-court-of-virginia-strikes-down-redistricting-amendment-keeps-current-maps-in-place/


note : Bolding mine


✌🏻

so the argument is that because there were voters who voted before the first GA vote, the requirement that there be an election between the two GA votes was not followed.

I can see that technicality and I do see it as a violation of the process. However, were I disagree is that it is a material breach. I believe it is extremely unlikely that the issue would have been decisive to flip enough of those early votes to change the composition of the second legislature.

The court isn't saying you can't change the map. The court is saying the way the referendum was brought before the voters violated state law.

Just go ahead and redistrict anyway? Do they have enough of a majority in Virginia?

I personally believe that given the ruling by Alito and other GOP gerrymandering, the steps outlined here are appropriate.

Link to tweet