Virginia Supreme Court Strikes Down Gerrymandering Law
On Friday, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled a voting law that would have effectively ensured Democrats four additional congressional seats as unconstitutional, bringing an end to the party’s case.
In light of the 4-3 ruling, the Democratic Party appears to be grappling with a sense of urgency, exploring some controversial avenues. This includes possibly lowering retirement ages for judges in self-governing territories and even shaking up their current leadership structure.
As they navigate this uncertainty, Democratic officials in Virginia are working to revive a gerrymandering plan by appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court.
However, the petition seems destined for failure, as some Democrats involved are reportedly struggling with basic details, such as distinguishing between different courts.
The legal appeal was filed late Friday by Attorney General Jay Jones, House Speaker Don Scott, and Senate President Pro Tempore Louise Lucas. They’ve urged the state’s highest court to postpone an order that nullified the gerrymandered referendum and the related constitutional amendment.
In a pointed remark, former Attorney General Jason Miyares, a Republican, pointed out a glaring error in a filing from Attorney General Tillman Breckenridge, which misspelled “Virginia House of Delegates.” Miyares was quick to note, “If you’re going to appeal to SCOTUS, please don’t misspell Virginia?”
Similarly, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon also spotted another misspelling of “Senator” in the same document, underscoring a troubling pattern.
Miyares further commented, “This motion has zero chance of success; one can only recall how $70 million in political funds and $10 million in taxpayer money were wasted on this illegal gerrymandering amendment. It will be declared null and void upon arrival.”
Despite Miyares’ skepticism, the Virginia Democratic Party appears keen to challenge his assertion. They submitted an emergency application asking the U.S. Supreme Court to block the state Supreme Court’s ruling, claiming it’s “seriously erroneous” concerning key federal law questions.
This emergency application, however, not only contained the previous misspellings but also included a new blunder, mislabeling it as an application to the Virginia Supreme Court instead of the U.S. Supreme Court. Miyares joked, “Good news: Democrats succeeded in spelling Virginia correctly. Bad news: They sent their emergency SCOTUS application to the wrong court. Baby steps.”
Despite the comical blunders, it’s important to note that the petition to the U.S. Supreme Court was incorrectly titled. Legal scholar Edward Whelan pointed out an issue with the document, stating, “It doesn’t make sense to say that an emergency application is addressed to the Virginia Supreme Court.”
Whelan also suggested that the Democratic petitioners might not be seeking the right remedy. “Even if the Supreme Court were to grant Virginia’s request for an emergency stay, the lower court’s injunction by the state Supreme Court would remain effective,” he wrote.
