Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

In It to Win It

(12,786 posts)
Fri May 8, 2026, 12:43 PM Friday

The glaring error in the Virginia Supreme Court's gerrymandering decision - Ian Millhiser

Gift Link
Vox

The case is about whether early voting nullifies Virginia’s power to amend its constitution

Scott turns on the provision of the Virginia Constitution that governs the state’s constitutional amendments. Briefly, in order to amend the constitution, the state legislature must vote to propose an amendment. Then, “after the next general election of members of the House of Delegates” is held, the legislature must again vote to approve the same amendment.

After that amendment is approved twice, by two subsequent legislatures, it is then submitted to the voters for their approval. If a majority of the voters approve of the amendment, it becomes part of the state constitution.

The majority of the state Supreme Court, however, claims that the more recent amendment is invalid because, when the state legislature first proposed this amendment in October 2025, it did so after early voting had already begun in the state. This is a problem, they claim, because it means that “1.3 million or so Virginians” had already cast their ballots before the amendment was proposed, and thus they were denied their opportunity to express support or disapproval of the proposed amendment when they cast their vote for state lawmakers.

In essence, the majority argues that Virginia voters who opposed the amendment were disenfranchised because they were denied an opportunity to vote for lawmakers who oppose it in the 2025 state legislative elections.

But there’s a pretty glaring problem with this disenfranchisement argument: The amendment was submitted to the voters in a referendum. Virginia voters were, in fact, given an opportunity to cast an up or down vote on the redistricting amendment. And a majority of them voted to approve it.

It’s my birthday this weekend so I’m off today. But Ian said everything I could have said about this BULLSHIT decision out of Virginia.

ElieNYC (@elienyc.bsky.social) 2026-05-08T16:35:06.463Z

The Virginia Supreme Court buried itself in dictionaries and missed the obvious www.vox.com/politics/488...

Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser.bsky.social) 2026-05-08T16:17:53.072Z
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

LymphocyteLover

(10,083 posts)
7. Yes. It seems like a very biased decision. I assume the 4 judges who voted to undo the new maps are conservatives?
Fri May 8, 2026, 02:59 PM
Friday

SSJVegeta

(3,045 posts)
11. VA has a l̶i̶b̶e̶r̶a̶l̶ conservative majority so a̶l̶l̶none of them wouldn̶t̶ likely be
Fri May 8, 2026, 03:22 PM
Friday

Meaning: You are correct

SSJVegeta

(3,045 posts)
9. Well i can actually see a valid appeal being accepted in federal court over proper interpretation of the law
Fri May 8, 2026, 03:21 PM
Friday

LetMyPeopleVote

(181,686 posts)
12. A Private Call Reveals Democrats' Desperation Over Tossing of Map (NYT gift article)
Sun May 10, 2026, 05:06 PM
Yesterday

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



https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/10/us/politics/democrats-virginia-plans-gerrymandering.html?unlocked_article_code=1.hVA.KzAI.Wf17nRa9PSjl&smid=nytcore-ios-share

During a private discussion on Saturday that included Democratic House members from Virginia and Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the minority leader, the lawmakers vented anger at their defeat at the Virginia Supreme Court, spoke about a collective determination to flip two or three Republican-held seats under the existing map and discussed a bank-shot proposal to redraw the congressional lines anyway, according to three people who participated in the call and two others who were briefed on it.....

Any plans to enact a new congressional map for this year’s midterm elections would require action in the next few days. In a court filing last month, Steven Koski, the commissioner of the Virginia Department of Elections, said any changes to the maps after Tuesday, May 12, “will significantly increase the risk” of his agency being unable to properly prepare for the state’s scheduled Aug. 4 primary election......

One key to the plan would be having Democrats in Richmond lower the mandatory retirement age for state Supreme Court justices, an idea that began circulating among state lawmakers and members of Congress after a column proposing a version of the idea was published on Friday night in The Downballot, a progressive newsletter.

Ms. Spanberger would have to sign off on any legislation that lowered the judicial retirement age. She has not been briefed on the proposal, the people involved in the discussion or briefed on it said. Her spokeswoman, Libby Wiet, declined to comment.

The first step in the process, as discussed on the delegation’s call, would be to invoke a January ruling by a circuit court judge in Tazewell County, Va., that said the 2026 constitutional amendment effort to redraw the maps was invalid because county officials did not post notice of it at courthouses and other public locations three months before a general election.

Representative Suhas Subramanyam, a Democrat who represents Loudoun County, Va., said in an interview that he supported doing whatever was necessary to preserve the map voters approved in last month’s referendum — including replacing the state’s Supreme Court justices.

Everyone has got to have a strong stomach right now; this is a complete disaster waiting to happen if people are timid,” said Mr. Subramanyam, who was on the Saturday call. “We have Republican states ignoring their constitutions and interrupting early voting and ignoring their Supreme Courts all together. We know based on that, Republicans would explore every single option possible to move this forward.”....

In an interview on Friday night, before his Saturday meeting with Virginia lawmakers, Mr. Jeffries said he was “exploring how to unravel this decision.”

“It’s an all-hands-on-deck moment, and it’s unprecedented in American history as far as we can tell that an actual election has been overturned by a handful of unelected judges,” Mr. Jeffries said. “We’re not going to step back, we will continue to fight back.”

This is a very aggressive plan which could backfire. However, this plan may be necessary to stop trump's gerrymandering.

LetMyPeopleVote

(181,686 posts)
13. Dems eye 'audacious' secret plan to oust entire blue state Supreme Court: report
Sun May 10, 2026, 06:07 PM
23 hrs ago

Given the outrageous ruling by SCOTUS, the GO P actions taken in Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississippi and Alabama, these steps are appropriate. The GOP cannot claim clean hands given the steps taken by SCOTUS and these states.

Dems eye 'audacious' secret plan to oust entire blue state Supreme Court: report

DO IT! Get creatove Dems. No shame. No "but my precious decorum". Fight. The. Fascists. #Virginia

www.rawstory.com/virginia-red...

br00t4c (@br00t4c.bsky.social) 2026-05-10T19:51:47.254Z

https://www.rawstory.com/virginia-redistricting-2676875271/

Congressional Democrats are quietly kicking around a long-shot scheme to clear out Virginia's entire Supreme Court, which just torched their gerrymandered congressional map.

During a private Saturday call that included Virginia's Democratic House delegation and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), lawmakers vented over Friday's ruling and floated what The New York Times described as "an audacious and possibly far-fetched idea" to replace every sitting justice and reinstate their map, according to a Sunday report.

The scheme includes lowering the mandatory judicial retirement age from 75 to 54 — the age of the youngest current justice — forcing all seven off the bench. Virginia judges are appointed by the Democratic-controlled General Assembly, which could then stack the court with friendly replacements.

"The conversation reflected the desperation and fury that have gripped the party after the state Supreme Court struck down a favorable map that had been ratified by voters," the Times wrote, calling the mass ouster the "most dramatic idea they discussed."

The idea reportedly drew "mixed reactions" on the call, and Democrats did not land on a path forward. Gov. Abigail Spanberger has not been briefed, her spokeswoman told the Times. Former Rep. James Moran (D-VA) warned the gambit would be "just a bridge too far" and could backfire.

Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA), who was on the call, told the Times he supports doing whatever is necessary, adding: "Everyone has got to have a strong stomach right now; this is a complete disaster waiting to happen if people are timid."
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The glaring error in the ...