Democrats Apply Double Standards in Constitutional Lawfare Against Republicans
Source: Hans Mahncke. "By Dems' Standards, VA Redistricting Lawyers Should Be Pariahs." May 19, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that Democrats are hypocrites who destroyed lawyer John Eastman's career for making constitutional arguments about the 2020 election, while defending Virginia Democrats who are planning much more extreme tactics like packing the state Supreme Court. He says this shows Democrats only punish constitutional hardball when Republicans do it.
Conclusion
Democrats and their legal allies are applying hypocritical double standards by destroying Republicans like John Eastman for constitutional arguments while defending or ignoring similar or more aggressive tactics by Democrats in Virginia redistricting
Premises
- John Eastman was professionally destroyed (disbarred, financially ruined) for advancing constitutional theories about the 2020 election that were deemed threats to democracy
- Virginia Democrats discussed far more aggressive tactics including lowering judicial retirement age from 73 to 54 to purge the entire state Supreme Court after an unfavorable redistricting ruling
- The Virginia strategy represents a more direct assault on institutional integrity than Eastman's legal arguments, as it seeks to eliminate rather than persuade constitutional actors
- Virginia Democratic lawyers advanced frivolous arguments to the U.S. Supreme Court that were immediately rejected, yet face no professional consequences unlike Eastman
- Media and legal institutions that demanded Eastman's destruction are now defending, minimizing, or ignoring the Virginia Democrats' more radical constitutional maneuvering
- The true principle operating is that aggressive constitutional tactics are only condemned when used by disfavored political causes, not when used by favored ones
Assumptions
- Eastman's constitutional theories, while potentially flawed, were legitimate legal arguments rather than criminal conduct
- Professional consequences should be applied consistently based on the nature of legal conduct rather than political affiliation
- The Virginia court-packing strategy represents a more severe threat to constitutional norms than Eastman's memo-writing
- Media and legal establishment reactions are reliable indicators of institutional double standards