Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

SSJVegeta

(3,022 posts)
5. The new precedent is that state laws in terms of redistricting are set in stone
Fri May 8, 2026, 10:23 AM
6 hrs ago

But appealing it would either force the supreme court to side with the gerrymandering. Or rule against it and give fodder for the plaintiffs in the southern states.

Alhena

(3,086 posts)
7. The only time SCOTUS hears appeals from state Supreme Courts is when federal issues are involved
Fri May 8, 2026, 10:29 AM
6 hrs ago

Lovie777

(23,552 posts)
9. Lets see what happens in Florida.................
Fri May 8, 2026, 10:31 AM
6 hrs ago

apparently the same situation but without support of the voters, what will Florida Supreme court do?

My bet is in favor of DeSantis partisan gerrymandering.

Partisan vs race, both are wrong in a so called democracy.

In It to Win It

(12,766 posts)
12. I have absolutely no faith in the Florida Supreme Court
Fri May 8, 2026, 10:56 AM
5 hrs ago

Even if they don't outright rule for DeSantis, they'll find some reason to delay while leaving the current gerrymander in place.

Amishman

(5,937 posts)
13. It's debatable, but the argument is the timing of the votes in legislature for the process.
Fri May 8, 2026, 11:13 AM
5 hrs ago

The change championed by referendum itself does not violate the VA constitution, it was that the required process was not followed (supposedly).

A proposed amendment must pass the general assembly twice, with an intervening election between the two.

The reasoning for striking it down is that since the first vote occurred during the VA early voting window had started already when the first vote was conducted, and that this means there had not been an entire intervening election in-between the two.

I get and acknowledge the technicality, but at the same time, saying that this 'incurably taints' the election seems like bullshit.

dweller

(28,625 posts)
15. Virginia Mercury report
Fri May 8, 2026, 11:42 AM
4 hrs ago

The redistricting battle began on Oct. 27, just days before the Nov. 4 state elections, when Democratic lawmakers introduced a constitutional amendment during a special session of the General Assembly that would allow congressional districts to be redrawn outside of the once-in-a-decade redistricting cycle tied to the census.

The proposal immediately sparked partisan fights over both the timing of the amendment and Democrats’ push to redraw Virginia’s congressional map ahead of the midterms.

The House advanced the proposal the next day, and the Senate approved it on Oct. 31 along party lines, pushing it forward as required by the multi-step constitutional process, which required the amendment to pass again in a subsequent session.

When lawmakers returned to Richmond in January, they approved the legislation a second time, but the measure soon became entangled in legal challenges.

After Hurley first ruled the amendment invalid, the Supreme Court of Virginia intervened, allowing the referendum to proceed despite the lower court ruling. At the time, justices made clear they were not resolving the broader legal questions, only ensuring that voters would have the opportunity to weigh in.

The court’s earlier decision to allow the referendum onto the ballot led many legal observers to believe the amendment would likely survive if voters approved it.
—————————-

The voters approved it by roughly 3%

https://virginiamercury.com/2026/05/08/supreme-court-of-virginia-strikes-down-redistricting-amendment-keeps-current-maps-in-place/


note : Bolding mine


✌🏻





Amishman

(5,937 posts)
16. yes, early voting began Sept 19th, well before the october general assembly vote
Fri May 8, 2026, 12:21 PM
4 hrs ago

so the argument is that because there were voters who voted before the first GA vote, the requirement that there be an election between the two GA votes was not followed.

I can see that technicality and I do see it as a violation of the process. However, were I disagree is that it is a material breach. I believe it is extremely unlikely that the issue would have been decisive to flip enough of those early votes to change the composition of the second legislature.

Buckeyeblue

(6,423 posts)
11. The ruling seems to be tied to a technicality of bringing the referendum to the voters
Fri May 8, 2026, 10:46 AM
5 hrs ago

The court isn't saying you can't change the map. The court is saying the way the referendum was brought before the voters violated state law.

videohead5

(2,990 posts)
14. Can Democrats
Fri May 8, 2026, 11:18 AM
5 hrs ago

Just go ahead and redistrict anyway? Do they have enough of a majority in Virginia?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Virginia Supreme Court se...