 |
| WTKR News 3 / YouTube |
‘Under this thesis, early Virginia voters unknowingly forfeited their constitutionally protected opportunity to vote for or against delegates who favor or disfavor amending the Constitution,’ the court wrote
The Supreme Court of Virginia struck down a gerrymandering attempt on Friday that would have allowed Democrats to effectively strip representation from millions of Virginians.In a 4-3 decision, the majority noted that Democrats violated the constitution in the way it shoehorned the referendum in at the last minute, not allowing voters to have a say in whether it was even put on the ballot.
“In this case, the Commonwealth submitted a proposed constitutional amendment to Virginia voters in an unprecedented manner that violated the intervening-election requirement in Article XII, Section 1 of the Constitution of Virginia,” the court wrote. “This violation irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void. For this reason, the congressional district maps issued by this Court in 2021 pursuant to Article II, Section 6-A of the Constitution of Virginia remain the governing maps for the upcoming 2026 congressional elections.”
The court also acknowledged in the first paragraph that the proposed amendment would have “authorize[d] partisan gerrymandering of congressional districts in the Commonwealth.”
Upholding the current map, that means Virginia’s congressional delegation will likely remain six Democrats and five Republicans, instead of 10 Democrats and one Republican, as the referendum would have allowed. The referendum would have also allowed five out of 11 U.S. Representatives from Virginia to come from one county, Fairfax.
As The Federalist reported, the constitutionality of the referendum came down to procedural requirements about how referendums actually make it onto the ballot for voters to decide. While other lawsuits that were percolating through the court made other procedural arguments, the Virginia Supreme Court said this process was tainted from the very beginning.
Virginia’s constitution requires that a proposed amendment be passed by two separate legislatures, with an intervening election, allowing voters to have a say on the referendum before it even makes it to a vote for the next legislature.
“This gives voters two opportunities — one indirect, the other direct — to voice their views on the proposed amendment,” the court states. “Voters can support or defeat candidates for the House of Delegates who either endorse or oppose the proposed amendment. If the General Assembly votes against it at the next legislative session, the process ends there. If the General Assembly votes in favor of the proposal, voters get a second direct opportunity to vote the proposed amendment up or down at the ballot box. The efficacy of the second popular vote depends in part upon the reliability of the first.”
The “reliability of the first” is where Democrats’ procedural rigging throws out the entire process.
Virginia’s elections last 45 days, ending in “Election Day,” but the Democrats in the 2025 General Assembly session waited until Election Day was four days away to pass the referendum, after more than 1 million votes had been cast.
“The four-day period (which included a weekend) was the ‘intervening’ period during which Virginia voters could find out what the proposed amendment actually said, whether their preferred candidate supported or opposed it, and whether they wanted to use their vote to express a view on the subject,” the court wrote, saying the move was “wholly unprecedented in Virginia’s history” and that of all the proposed amendments adopted under the current procedure, the court found “none in which the General Assembly passed a proposed amendment after voting in the general election had already begun.”
Attorney General Jay Jones’ office argued that the 1.3 million Virginians who cast their ballots in the 42 voting days prior to the General Assembly passing the referendum “squandered that opportunity” to be part of the referendum process, the court wrote, “by accepting the Commonwealth’s invitation to cast their votes” during the early period.
“Under this thesis, early Virginia voters unknowingly forfeited their constitutionally protected opportunity to vote for or against delegates who favor or disfavor amending the Constitution by not anticipating a legislative vote on a constitutional amendment four days before the last day of voting,” the court stated. “To be sure, under the Commonwealth’s logic, the legislative vote could just as well have been one day before.” --->READ MORE HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment