Dems Called Out by VA Supreme Court Justices Over Brazen Gerrymander Power Grab

The Supreme Court of Virginia, otherwise known as SCOVA, heard oral arguments Monday morning over legal and constitutional challenges to the gerrymandered congressional map that was approved via referendum last Tuesday, and a few of the Justices had pointed questions for the pro-gerrymander side.

As RedState previously reported, Virginia voters approved an amendment to the state constitution that removes redistricting power from a non-partisan commission and places it with state lawmakers (a/k/a, Democrats). The final numbers were closer than expected, with the yes side garnering around 51 percent of the vote and the no side coming in at 48.5 percent. Those numbers could still change as the counts from mail-in ballots are finalized.

The result of last week's election was that voters essentially signed off on the brazenly gerrymandered map designed by Democrats that would move the commonwealth from a 6D-5R congressional makeup to a 10D-1R one. There's only one thing that can stop it from being adopted: the courts. And that brings us to Monday's showdown at SCOVA.

---

READ MORE: Virginia Dems May Have Gerrymandered Themselves Straight Into a Legal Buzzsaw - Former AG Explains It All

After the Vote, a Judge Just Upended Virginia’s Redistricting Plan

---

The issue being argued was the process that got the referendum in front of voters in the first place; its legal journey started before early voting on the referendum began, but SCOVA decided it wouldn't consider the merits until after the votes were counted. Team Gerrymander acknowledged early in the hearing, after being taken to task by one of the Justices, that last week's "yes" vote was irrelevant to the constitutional matter now before the court. 

Because the oral arguments were only carried on an audio feed, we at home had to use our imaginations. 

 

This is what I imagine the Dem lawyer arguing at SCOVA right now looks like. pic.twitter.com/LqsiCBwBEw

— Teri Christoph (@TeriChristoph) April 27, 2026

Team Gerrymander, led not by Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones, but instead by outside counsel from California, went first, and they almost immediately ran afoul of at least one or two of the justices, who got them to admit that the General Assembly did not, in fact, follow their own rules for advancing the referendum.

Things got super spicy when Team Gerrymander tried and failed miserably to adequately define what an election is. Whereas Democrats have pushed early voting for decades, they now argue that the election is really only that one day in November. A few of the Justices took notice.

Here's an explanation of the Democrats' circular thinking on the matter:

🚨 Dems argue Election Day is a single day, and doesn’t include early voting, in order to try to circumvent their unconstitutional maneuvers.

SCOVA HEARING: Sounds like we’re on solid ground. Justices didn’t like that early voting had started prior to the first passage of the…

— Wren Williams (@WrenWilliamsVA) April 27, 2026

Dems argue Election Day is a single day, and doesn’t include early voting, in order to try to circumvent their unconstitutional maneuvers.

SCOVA HEARING: Sounds like we’re on solid ground. Justices didn’t like that early voting had started prior to the first passage of the amendment by the general assembly. Also, made it clear that what happened last Tuesday has no bearing on the case before them today. 

VA Constitution requires an “intervening election” between the first passage of the bill by the general assembly and the second passage of the constitutional amendment language by the general assembly.

The funny part is Dems are now arguing that Nov. 2025 was the intervening election. They argue Election Day is only on the first Tuesday in November, and early voting doesn’t count as part of the election!  Can’t make this up.🤣 

The Dems need early voting to be a single day now, not 45 days, for this to work. If it’s a single day, then it doesn’t matter that early voting started before the Dems passed the amendment in the general assembly the first time, because they did it “before” the election. 

If Election Day is not a single day, and the first day of early voting is the beginning of the “intervening election,” then the general assembly did NOT pass the amendment language before the intervening election. The election had already started and millions of votes had been cast by then in late October.

We’ll wait to see what the Court says. I’m sure they won’t delay very long in their ruling.

When Team Freedom/Team Virginia got their turn, they told the story of a Democrat voter who regretted voting early once she learned her own side decided at the last minute to jam through gerrymandering. 

She voted early in the 2025 general for her delegate, Rodney Willett. After that, in the winning days of the election, was Mr. Willett that introduced this new proposed amendment. And she was very unhappy about this. She wished she could redo her vote, but she couldn't. She was denied the opportunity. She, like a million or more other people, voted before this proposed amendment was ever even proposed. 

None of these voters had any idea this was coming. And that's not how the process is supposed to work. Because as I mentioned before, it's the people, the people of the Commonwealth, the voters who possess the power to amend or modify the Constitution. And denying them the knowledge that this proposed amendment is coming through should undermine the whole process.

The oral arguments wrapped up after about an hour, and now the Justices are deliberating the constitutionality of the Democrats' power grab. So, what happens next? Here you go:

To help clear up any confusion here's the current redistricting status:

- Certification is still enjoined
- SCOVA expected to rule on today's case in 2-4 weeks
- Another case re: ballot language still yet to be heard

— Virginia Project (@ProjectVirginia) April 27, 2026

Ironically, Monday was the 100th day in office for Gov. Spanberger, who has quite deservedly taken a lot of heat for running as an anti-gerrymandering candidate, but is now "governing" as a power-mad tyrant who can't get enough of Democrat-led "redistricting."