It's Not Over — the Courts Could (And Should) Neuter Virginia's Anti-Democratic Gerrymandering Gambit

For the moment, the Democrats have won. Their Machiavellian gerrymandering scheme passed by a slim margin Tuesday night, slicing and dicing Virginia's congressional districts into a ridiculous jigsaw puzzle that most closely resembles Illinois’ comical maps — meaning they have no logic, other than to rig the result and disenfranchise millions of voters.

---

MORE: Breaking: The Results Are In – Here's How Virginia Voted on Democrat-Led Gerrymandering

Even Liberal Media Is Side-Eyeing Virginia’s Sketchy Redistricting Plan

---

We saw a similar successful effort in California, with their nakedly partisan Prop. 50, which sidelines a huge percentage of the voting public, but in leftist Gov. Abigail Spanberger's Cavalier State, the battle is actually not over.

Who could change the direction of this abject political power play, which has no basis in high-minded principle but is simply a ruthless, callous, authoritarian ploy? The courts. 

Now, as I’ve written, I’m no fan of how an unnerving number of district judges have consistently ruled in what seems like a coordinated effort to kneecap President Donald Trump’s agenda at every turn imaginable, but they could actually prove themselves worthy for a change.

Former Virginia Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin

 

 is urging them to do just that:

I urge the Virginia Supreme Court

 

to rule against this unconstitutional process that will disenfranchise millions of Virginians.

 

“Disenfranchise” is exactly the right word, and it’s one that the Democrats regularly bring up as they thwart the common-sense legislation, the SAVE Act, which would require ID to vote. But when it comes to Republicans, they don’t care if they lock them out of the process by deeply unethical maneuvers. “The end justifies the means” is at the top of their playbook.

But Virginia’s machinations may have problems:

Tuesday's referendum may not be the final word. The state Supreme Court is considering whether the redistricting plan is illegal in a case that could make the referendum results meaningless….

In February, Democratic state lawmakers passed a new U.S. House map to take effect pending the outcome of the redistricting referendum. Republicans have filed multiple legal challenges against the effort.

A Tazewell County judge ruled that the redistricting push was illegal for several reasons. Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley Jr. said lawmakers failed to follow their own rules for adding the redistricting amendment to a special session.

Oh. You mean they cheated? I’m shocked to see chicanery and dubious anti-democratic tactics perpetrated by the Democrats. And here I thought they were the defenders of democracy. 

Principles be damned:

Wouldn’t it be a hoot if the whole disgusting effort was for naught? It could happen:

He [Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley Jr.]

 

ruled that their initial vote failed to occur before the public began casting ballots in last year’s general election and thus didn’t count toward the two-step process. He also ruled that the state failed to publish the amendment three months before that election, as required by law.

Back in February, the state Supreme Court agreed to allow the referendum to proceed before the court moves to make its final ruling.

If the state Supreme Court agrees with the lower court, the results from Tuesday's vote could be rendered moot.

I’ve lost faith in the judicial system in this country since January, 2025, when Trump moved back into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., especially in the lower courts. However, it would be amazing to see if they actually did the right thing for a change, and nuked this raw, corrupt exercise of political power.

Do it.