GOP urges Virginia high court to reverse voter-backed redistricting

RICHMOND, Va. (CN) —The Supreme Court of Virginia heard from Republican leaders Monday who argued their Democratic colleagues violated procedure when passing a redistricting referendum.

The hearing comes a week after voters approved a constitutional amendment creating a new congressional map expected to change Virginia from a state with six Democratic and five Republican seats to 10 Democratic seats and just one Republican in the U.S. House of Representatives. Democrats say the map is a necessary response to President Donald Trump’s calls on other states, including Texas and North Carolina, to redraw their congressional maps to help elect more Republicans.

In January, a local judge in rural Tazewell County sided with three Republican politicians and three voters in their lawsuit filed against Democratic leadership and the clerks of the General Assembly. However, the high court allowed the referendum to proceed in the interim.

The Republicans offered three procedural reasons to invalidate the referendum. They first argued the legislature failed to pass the amendment before an intervening general election, as the state constitution requires. Secondly, the Republicans argue the General Assembly lacked authority to adopt the proposed amendment during an offseason special session. Finally, they contend the rushed process violated a section of the constitution requiring court clerks to publish proposed amendments three months before the next ensuing general election.

“A bare partisan majority of the General Assembly ran with a proposed amendment through the legislature, departing radically from the mandated constitutional amendment process and historical practice, severely undermining the rights of Virginia voters,” attorney Thomas McCarthy, representing the Republicans, said at the hearing. “Virginians have long distrusted legislative power and fear the tyranny from the legislature, which is why there are strict limits in the Virginia Constitution on when and how the legislature can lead.”

The justices seemed most interested in the argument that the process failed to give voters a chance to give input through a general election. The state constitution requires the General Assembly to allow voters to vote on representation before implementing any amendments, but Democrats passed the amendment for the first time after nearly a million Virginians had already cast their ballots through early voting in the 2025 special election.

The argument hinges on the definition of the word election. Republicans argue that early voting is part of an election, so Democrats missed the opportunity to use the fall 2025 election. Democrats, meanwhile, argue they satisfied the constitutional requirements because an election is defined as the day the votes are counted.

Justice Wesley Russell asked the Democrats whether they could pass an amendment with just hours before polls closed on election day.

“The case that we have here is the General Assembly passed the proposed amendment before the election, where the term election is defined in the constitution by five separate provisions, as a single day that takes place in November,” attorney Matthew Seligman, representing the Democrats, said at the hearing. “Article II, Section 6 defines the election as the November general election. That is an election that takes place in November, not over a three-month period that begins in September.”

Seligman said those who vote early understand the risks involved.

“I understand the concern that someone who casts a ballot before something happens might be upset or regret, and that is a problem that is endemic to early voting,” Seligman said. “It’s worth pointing out that every single voter in the Commonwealth has the option to cast their ballot on election day.”

The justices also seemed to give weight to the argument that the Democrats exceeded the special session’s scope when they adopted the amendment at the first of the two required times. Governor Glenn Youngkin initially called the legislature into special session in the summer of 2024 to fix a budget mistake that cut funding to a program providing college tuition to the spouses and children of military members killed in active duty.

“It’s unprecedented, and petitioners do not cite a single occasion where a special session went outside of its bounds in this manner,” McCarthy said.

Democrats, who controlled the General Assembly, refused to end the special session officially. This, the Democrats argue, allowed them to take up business outside of the annually designated time for legislative sessions in January.

“Would a special session convened in 1929, if they forgot to adjourn sine die, still be in session?” Russell asked.

The Republicans claim any business unrelated to the budget requires a new special session, which requires a two-thirds majority of the legislature to agree to convene unless the governor calls the special session.

Justice Stephen McCullough asked McCarthy why the General Assembly shouldn’t be able to interpret its own rules and procedures.

“The people are the ones who hold the power to amend or modify the Constitution,” McCarthy responded. “It’s in the people where the power lies."

The justices expressed less interest in the argument concerning the court notice requirement. McCullough said most voters don’t rely on courthouse postings to get their news anymore.

The same Tazewell judge ruled in favor of the Republican National Committee and several Republican congressmen in a separate challenge on April 22. The Supreme Court of Virginia is expected to hear six new arguments hoping to invalidate the referendum results. The additional arguments concern the ballot question’s partisan language. The judge’s ruling halted the certification process.

“The challengers here are asking to overturn the will of the people of the commonwealth of Virginia,” Seligman said at a post-hearing press conference. “Over 2 million people voted in favor of ratifying this proposed constitutional amendment last Tuesday, and the challengers are asking to overturn that democratic result.”

The justices did not indicate when they would issue a ruling.

“The constitution was not followed, and we hope that the court will rule accordingly,” Republican state Senator Ryan McDougle said after the hearing.