Article Text

Virginia’s Supreme Court questioned Monday whether the Democratic-led General Assembly followed the state constitution when it placed a congressional redistricting amendment before voters, putting a newly approved map—and potentially four Democratic gains in the U.S. House—at risk.

Voters narrowly approved the new districts last week. Republican challengers argue that lawmakers violated procedural requirements while advancing the constitutional amendment that authorized mid-decade redistricting.

If the justices agree, they could invalidate the amendment and effectively erase the result of the statewide vote. The court did not rule immediately after Monday’s arguments.

The dispute is part of a nationwide redistricting fight ahead of November’s midterm election, which will determine whether Republicans retain their narrow House majority.

President Donald Trump accelerated that battle last summer by urging Texas Republicans to redraw congressional districts to improve their chances of gaining several seats. Other states responded with their own efforts, culminating last week in Virginia voters approving the new map.

Florida could be next. Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis has proposed districts that could offset Virginia’s changes by improving Republican prospects in several seats. Redistricting is on the agenda for a special session of Florida’s GOP-controlled Legislature beginning Tuesday.

Justices Debate What Constitutes an Election

Virginia’s redistricting commission was created through a voter-approved constitutional amendment. To bypass that framework and redraw congressional districts, lawmakers had to propose another amendment.

Virginia requires such a resolution to pass during two separate legislative sessions, with a state election occurring between them, before the amendment can go to voters.

The General Assembly took its first vote last October after early voting had started but before the general election concluded. The justices focused on whether that vote came too late.

Matthew Seligman, an attorney defending the legislature, argued that “election” should be interpreted narrowly as the Tuesday on which the general election formally occurs. Under that definition, lawmakers approved the resolution before the election and complied with the constitution.

Thomas McCarthy, representing the challengers, argued that an election encompasses the entire period when voters can cast ballots, including Virginia’s several weeks of early voting. Under that interpretation, the legislature acted only after the election was already underway.

Lawsuit Pits Procedure Against the Voters’ Decision

McCarthy said the purpose of requiring an election between the legislature’s two votes is to let Virginians evaluate candidates based on whether they support a proposed constitutional amendment.

He cited plaintiff Camilla Simon, a Democratic voter who cast an early ballot last fall for Democratic Del. Rodney Willett. Willett later sponsored the redistricting amendment, after Simon had voted. McCarthy said she wished she could reverse her decision after learning of his involvement.

“None of these voters had any idea this was coming, and that’s not how this process is supposed to work,” McCarthy told the justices.

Supporters of the new districts argue that invalidating the amendment would disregard the decision voters made last week.

Seligman told reporters after the hearing that Virginians had ratified the amendment and that the challengers were seeking to overturn that democratic result.

National Redistricting Fight Remains Close

Neither party has secured a clear advantage from the states that have redrawn congressional districts for this year’s midterms.

Republicans believe revised maps in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio could deliver as many as nine additional seats. Democrats estimate they could gain up to 10 seats from new districts in California, Utah and Virginia. Legal challenges remain pending in Virginia and Missouri.

Virginia’s current U.S. House delegation consists of six Democrats and five Republicans. Those members were elected from districts imposed by a court after a bipartisan commission failed to agree on a map following the 2020 census.

The voter-approved map could improve Democrats’ chances of winning 10 of Virginia’s 11 congressional districts. Some candidates are already campaigning under the new boundaries ahead of the Aug. 4 primary.

Other Virginia Challenges Remain Pending

In January, Circuit Judge Jack Hurley Jr. of rural Tazewell County ruled that lawmakers failed to follow their own procedures when adding the amendment to a special legislative session last fall.

Hurley also found that the General Assembly did not initially approve the amendment before voting began in the previous year’s general election. He further ruled that the state had failed to publish the proposal three months before the election as required by law. He declared the amendment invalid and void.

The Virginia Supreme Court paused Hurley’s order, allowing the referendum to proceed before hearing the case.

During Monday’s hearing, the justices also questioned whether lawmakers had authority to expand the special session’s agenda and whether failure to meet the three-month public-notice requirement was serious enough to nullify an amendment approved by voters.

Republicans have filed at least two other legal challenges that remain before the courts.