The Virginia high court just tossed a brazen attempt to rewrite maps and hand Democrats 10 of 11 seats, and now some in the party are reportedly plotting to purge the state Supreme Court to get those maps back. The backlash was swift, loud, and ugly, with leaders threatening everything from court fights to institutional changes that would let the General Assembly replace justices. What started as a billion-dollar-style campaign ended with a 4-3 decision and a scramble to find ways around the rule of law. This piece walks through the ruling, the political meltdown, and the alarming proposals floated to sidestep it.
Last month Virginia voters faced an amendment pushed by a heavy Democrat ad effort featuring Barack Obama and Abigail Spanberger, aimed at letting the General Assembly adopt a new congressional map. The proposal was designed to flip the state from a 6-5 split to a map that could hand Democrats 10 of 11 seats in the next midterms. The Virginia Supreme Court allowed the referendum to go forward but warned it might later have to resolve questions about its legality.
The high court delivered that resolution in a 4-3 opinion in McDougle, declaring the amendment unconstitutional because the legislative process violated the state constitution’s timing rules. “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,” said the court. “This violation irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void.”
The decision means the older 2021 maps, which left Republicans with five seats and Democrats with six, will be used for the 2026 midterms. Democrats predictably reacted like a party that lost control of the scoreboard, calling the ruling illegitimate and promising a full court press. ‘The gut-and-pack scheme sets aside any pretense of principle.’
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), for instance, that the “decision to overturn an entire election is an unprecedented and undemocratic action that cannot stand.” Other leaders vowed to “explore all options to overturn this shocking decision,” and a number of Virginia Democrats publicly said “all options” were on the table. “We’re going to fight every way possible, whether that’s through the courts, whether that’s through legislatures, or whether that’s at the ballot box.”
Behind closed doors the mood was even worse. Participants on a private call reportedly discussed dramatic moves to reassert control, including the idea of purging the entire Virginia Supreme Court and appointing friendly justices who would reverse the ruling. One of the ideas floated was to change the judicial retirement age so incumbents would be forced off the bench almost immediately, clearing spots for new, partisan appointees.
As written by one academic on the subject, “Current law sets the mandatory retirement age at 73: ‘Any member who attains 73 years of age shall be retired 20 days after the convening of the next regular session of the General Assembly following his seventy-third birthday,'” “This number is arbitrary. States around the country with similar laws mandate retirement across a wide range of ages. Virginia lawmakers can simply lower theirs. Make it 54 for Supreme Court justices — the age of the youngest justice, Stephen McCullough, who joined the majority opinion — and make it take effect immediately.”
The reported plan would essentially work in two steps: first, try to use a prior procedural ruling to attack the validity of the commission-creating amendment, and second, push through a law to lower the mandatory judicial retirement age so the General Assembly could appoint replacements. If that sounds like packing the court and rewriting the rules to suit the moment, that’s because it is.
Republican leaders were blunt. By contrast, Ryan McDougle, Republican leader of the Virginia Senate, , “This is a brazen assault on our democracy. “In our nation’s 250th Anniversary, Democrats knowingly violate the Constitution, ram through deceptive ballot language to deceive and divide voters, then demand the Court not rule until after the vote. These hypocrites now pretend to defend democracy by removing lawfully appointed Supreme Court Justices because they blocked their illegal rewrite of the Constitution.”
The Virginia GOP , “Those claiming to care about fairness and democracy should respect the rule of law instead of threatening to pack the Supreme Court and nullify the Virginia Constitution.” Legal commentators also blasted the concept. “The sack-and-pack scheme sets aside any pretense of principle. The Democrats would simply adopt a ridiculously low retirement age for the sole purpose of populating the court with reliable and robotic justices. The fact that an academic and various pundits would expressly float such an idea is another chilling reminder of the growing radicalization on the left.”
Not everyone on the call balked at the idea. U.S. Rep. Suhas Subramanyam said he supported aggressive action, adding, “Everyone has got to have a strong stomach right now; this is a complete disaster waiting to happen if people are timid.” That sentiment captures the choice Republicans see: defend the rule of law now or watch basic constitutional checks be hollowed out for short-term political gain.
Virginia Supreme Court. Mike Kropf-Pool/Getty Images
https://x.com/theblaze/status/2052776220631150730?s=20
