Virginia Supreme Court Reviews Redistricting Amendment

The Virginia Supreme Court held oral arguments on Tuesday concerning a challenge to the redistricting amendment. A former state prosecutor remarked that the Democratic push for early voting might disrupt redistricting efforts.

The court seemed to apply more pressure on the Democratic “Yes” camp than on the Republican challengers. Chief Justice Cleo Powell issued a court order before the hearing.

Certification of the election is currently on hold due to a legal challenge filed by Tazewell County Judge Jack Hurley Jr., who projected a very close victory for the “yes” campaign. Meanwhile, an additional legal argument about the legitimacy of the October-November process that led to the referendum was also reviewed in a Richmond Superior Court.

Former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli commented after Monday’s proceedings, noting that only a few justices directed questions at the parties involved, and those directed toward the “yes” camp were particularly pointed.

Attorneys Richard Hawkins and Matthew Seligman, along with Solicitor General Tillman Breckenridge, represented the Democrats looking to uphold the election results. In contrast, attorney Thomas McCarthy defended the Republican objections raised by Senate Minority Leader Ryan McDougle and other officials.

The first question posed by Judge Wesley Russell to Seligman and Hawkins was whether the outcome of the vote carried any legal weight, to which the attorneys conceded that it did not.

Cuccinelli noted that Democrats, particularly Attorney General Jay Jones, have been using this victory to support their redistricting efforts. He cited that the defense, which hinges on the “will of the people,” was deemed irrelevant in court.

Cuccinelli criticized the defendants for being “stunningly disrespectful” when addressed about the merits, especially considering that a 45-day early voting period existed during the last time Democrats had complete control in Richmond. He suggested that early voters were essentially taking risks with potential late surprises in redistricting.

The former AG indicated that the Democratic campaign had been outpaced, especially when Republicans outspent them three to one, arguing that Democrats only mobilized voters out of frustration, benefiting the Republicans.

Seligman argued to the justices that Virginians engaged in a clearly established process, as described in the Virginia Constitution, while claiming the General Assembly acted suitably during a special session in October to pass the bill.

On the other hand, Republicans contended that the amendment did not reflect the initially intended special session called by then-Governor Glenn Youngkin. They also asserted that the upcoming November 2025 election should not qualify as an “intervening election” as early voting had already started.

Seligman indicated that the Legislature respectfully sent the amendment back to lawmakers if necessary, leading to its public vote. He pointed out that the circuit court attempted to disrupt this democratic process.

One justice noted a disconnect in Seligman’s legal argument, referencing past rulings and questioning why Democrats were asking the court to overlook procedural issues before the election.

Another justice raised a hypothetical concerning the status of a long-ago special session that didn’t adjourn, leading to a discussion about practices in Richmond and Washington.

In contrast, the questions for McCarthy appeared to be more open-ended. He began by asserting that the redistricting amendment breached several state constitutional restrictions regarding special sessions, claiming that Youngkin had convened it for fiscal matters, not for electoral purposes.

The justices then pressed McCarthy to elaborate on the historic context of this special session and the significance of the legislative requirements compared to the governor’s authority.

As the court is expected to address this matter swiftly, there is a pressing timeline, with the 2026 primary election only about two months away. District boundaries will need to be determined by then.