The Virginia Supreme Court on Friday struck down a voter-approved congressional redistricting plan, ruling that Democrats violated constitutional procedures when placing the referendum on the ballot for last month’s special election.
Virginia voters approved the constitutional amendment to allow for redrawing the state’s congressional map on April 21, which was expected to help Democrats win as many as four additional House seats in the midterm elections.
But in its 4-3 decision, the court on Friday found that the process used to place the amendment on the ballot did not comply with Virginia’s constitutional rules governing how such proposals must be approved by the legislature before being presented to voters. As a result, the justices upheld a lower court ruling that blocks the amendment from being certified and implemented.
Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones accused the state Supreme Court’s conservative majority of putting “politics over the rule of law.”
“This decision silences the voices of the millions of Virginians who cast their ballots in every corner of the Commonwealth, and it fuels the growing fears across our nation about the state of our democracy,” Jones said in a statement, adding, “The Republican-led majority of the Supreme Court of Virginia contorted the plain language of the Constitution and Code of Virginia to give it a meaning that was never intended, which allowed them to reach the wrong legal conclusion that fit their political agenda. The consequences of their error are grave.”
Jones said his office is considering “every legal pathway forward” in response to the “unprecedented order.”
President Donald Trump, meanwhile, applauded Friday’s ruling, calling it a “huge win for the Republican Party, and America, in Virginia” in a Truth Social post.
The case stems from a lawsuit filed in October by Republican lawmakers, including state Sen. Ryan McDougle and a member of Virginia’s bipartisan redistricting commission. The plaintiffs argued that Democratic lawmakers improperly advanced the amendment, bypassing key procedural safeguards designed to ensure transparency and consistency in constitutional changes.
According to the Virginia Constitution, amendments must pass the General Assembly twice before going to voters. Plaintiffs argued that the process was not properly followed, citing concerns about the intervening election, the required 90-day public notice and the amendment’s advancement during a budget-focused special session.
A Tazewell County Circuit Court judge sided with the plaintiffs in January on procedural grounds, but ultimately, the state’s Supreme Court later allowed the referendum to take place while pledging to review the case after the election.
Recommended
On April 21, voters voted in favor of overhauling the state’s redistricting process in a likely boost for Democrats ahead of the midterm elections. However, a Virginia judge blocked the certification of those results after finding the referendum process violated parts of the Virginia Constitution. In response to the Virginia attorney general’s appeal of that decision, the state Supreme Court ruled to uphold the block as legal challenges continue.
The original ballot measure sought to change how political districts are drawn through 2030, an issue that has been the subject of repeated legal and political battles in Virginia. Depending on the final outcome and how the courts rule, the measure could either preserve the current system or introduce a new framework that shifts authority over map-drawing.
If implemented, the Democratic-backed plan would reshape Virginia’s 11 congressional districts in a way that would allow Democrats to flip as many as four Republican-held seats. The current map gives Democrats a 6-5 edge, while the proposed redraw could expand that advantage to 10-1.
Legal battles over redistricting continue to play out across the country, as courts are increasingly asked to weigh in on how political maps are drawn and whether they comply with constitutional and statutory requirements.
Similar disputes have unfolded in states such as North Carolina and Alabama, where courts have reviewed maps for potential partisan gerrymandering or violations of the Voting Rights Act.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at CNN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.