The Virginia Supreme Court struck down a constitutional amendment that voters narrowly passed last month, finding that the Democratic-controlled legislature improperly began the process of placing the amendment on the ballot after early voting had begun in Virginia's general election last fall. The 4-3 state court decision has prompted Democrats to file an emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to reverse the ruling.
The move came after the Virginia Supreme Court on Friday invalidated the ballot measure that would have given Democrats an additional four winnable U.S. House seats. Democrats argued unsuccessfully that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that, even if early voting is underway, an election does not happen until Election Day itself.
Procedural Grounds for Reversal
The Virginia Supreme Court's decision centered on the timing of the legislative process, determining that beginning the amendment process after early voting had commenced violated proper constitutional procedures. The justices are appointed by the legislature, which has flipped between the two parties in recent decades, and the body is generally not seen as having a clear ideological bent.
Lawyers for Virginia Democrats and the state's Democratic Attorney General, Jay Jones, wrote, "The Court overrode the will of the people who ratified the amendment by ordering the Commonwealth to conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected," and added, "The irreparable harm resulting from the Supreme Court of Virginia's decision is profound and immediate."
National Redistricting Competition
The appeal is the latest twist in the nation's mid-decade redistricting competition. It was kicked off last year by President Donald Trump urging Republican-controlled states to redraw their lines and was supercharged by a recent Supreme Court ruling severely weakening the Voting Rights Act.
The filing is a sign of Democratic desperation after the Virginia decision deprived them of four winnable House seats in the mid-decade redistricting race that President Donald Trump kicked off last year. Democrats are still favorites to recapture the House of Representatives, but their GOP rivals have claimed to have gained more than a dozen seats through redistricting. The voter-approved Virginia map would have partly offset that.
Federal Court Precedent
The Supreme Court tries to avoid second-guessing state courts' interpretations of their own constitutions. In 2023, in the third year since the request was turned down, it turned down a request by North Carolina Republicans to overrule a state Supreme Court decision that blocked the GOP's congressional map.
The Virginia amendment had been launched long before the recent ruling and was intended as a response to Republican gains in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio, and to blunt a new map in Florida that just became law. Once the Virginia amendment passed, it briefly turned the nationwide redistricting scramble into a draw between the two parties. That was unraveled by the Virginia Supreme Court's decision.
Why This Matters:
The Virginia Supreme Court's decision to invalidate a voter-approved constitutional amendment on procedural grounds raises questions about the proper sequencing of legislative actions during election periods and the finality of ballot measures once approved by voters. The ruling preserves existing congressional district lines and maintains the competitive balance established through the mid-decade redistricting process initiated by Republican-controlled states. The case tests federal judicial restraint in reviewing state constitutional interpretations, a principle the U.S. Supreme Court has previously upheld when declining to overturn state court decisions on redistricting matters. The outcome will determine whether state procedural requirements can override voter-approved amendments and affects the partisan composition of Virginia's congressional delegation, with implications for the national balance of power in the House of Representatives.