Virginia Supreme Court strikes down gerrymandered redistricting plan

Added: 2026-05-12

[00:00:00]Developments on a big political shake-up today in a four-to-three decision, the Virginia Supreme Court struck down Democrats 10-to-1 gerrymandered congressional district map. Voters narrowly approved it on April 21st. The court said the Constitution requires the General Assembly to pass a constitutional amendments once before an election and then again after the newly elected assembly is seated. The court says that did not happen. Our Nick Minock joins us live now with new reaction from both sides.

[00:00:31]Nick.

[00:00:34]Michelle, as you can imagine, Republicans in Virginia and nationally are thrilled with this decision, which keeps Virginia's competitive congressional districts in play for the 2026 midterm elections, but Democrats are fuming.

[00:00:50]Democrats pushed to gerrymander Virginia's 11 congressional districts and eliminate all but one Republican US House seat in the Commonwealth was dealt a death blow from the Virginia Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled Democratic state lawmakers submitted a proposed constitutional amendment to Virginia voters in an unprecedented manner that violated the intervening election requirement in the Virginia Constitution. The court added, "Quote, this violation irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void." Democratic Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell disagrees with the court's decision. Today, the Supreme Court of Virginia overturned the statewide election results for the first time in the 250-year history of our Commonwealth. It's it's really unprecedented. It's disappointing. And they did it using a a definition of election that nobody ever heard of. But I think Virginia voters will be very angry about what this anti-democratic action the Supreme Court took.

[00:01:46]And I think you're going to see renewed interest by Virginia voters in these races. Virginia GOP Senate Minority Leader Ryan McDougle argues the court followed the law and determined the Constitution was violated before the referendum was placed before voters.

[00:02:00]McDougal adds, "If Democrats wanted to know the court's position before voters cast their ballots, Governor Abigail Spanberger and Attorney General Jay Jones shouldn't have pushed to have the court hear the challenge until after the April 21st election took place." The constitution is clear on what the law requires in order to change it. And the court ruled in that way.

[00:02:26]Court looks at law, doesn't look at feelings. But I also do find it very interesting, the same people that are now complaining that the court ruled after the vote, were the ones that asked the court not to rule before the vote was taken. The court could have come down with this decision. The briefing schedule could have been sooner. The oral arguments could have been sooner.

[00:02:48]But the the petitioner in this case, the Attorney General's team asked the court not to rule until after the election.

[00:02:59]In its ruling, the Virginia Supreme Court also mentioned that the Attorney General Jay Jones insisted that the court not make a decision on this until after the referendum. Back to you. All right. So, Nick, where do Democrats go from here?

[00:03:15]Well, I asked Attorney Serville, is there any recourse? He said that Attorney General Jay Jones could ask the court to reconsider, but that would likely make no difference at all. So, this is the end of the road. We keep the maps as they were before this referendum is what Mr. Serville told me. And this puts national Democrats in a tough spot going into the midterm elections. They were hoping to win four additional seats with this 10-to-1 map. They bet big on Virginia, and they outspent Republicans three to one. And this referendum, the The now is millions of dollars in debt.

[00:03:53]Reporting live in Fairfax County, Nick Minock, 7 News. Right about that. Also, possibility they could go at it again in '28. We'll have to wait and see. Just minutes after news broke about the overturned referendum, I spoke with Dr. Casey Myers, a Virginia Tech professor and political expert. Here's what he had to say about how unusual it is for a court to overturn a voter-approved measure.

[00:04:18]It is something though that the the the court notes in its decision that is within their right to do so. Uh they had allowed this referendum to go forward based on precedent that allowed referendums to take place and then the constitutionality to be determined at a later time. But they made a point to say just because something is passed through a referendum, doesn't mean that the underlying process was constitutional.

[00:04:39]And so they they reserved that right on judicial review and and and asserted that in the decision. And ultimately, that's how they came to the conclusion that this was not the correct process or a non-constitutional process.

[00:04:51]All right, let's get a look now at some more of the reaction coming in on this decision. Governor Abigail Spanberger said she is quote disappointed by the ruling and turning her attention now to the midterms. Virginia's Democratic senators are also weighing in. Senator Mark Warner said he respected the decision, but voters deserve to have their voices heard. And on the other side of the aisle, Virginia GOP Congressman Ben Cline, who was likely to lose his seat if the new map stood, said quote, "It was always going to end up this way." And he accused Democrats of writing a purposefully misleading ballot question.