Virginia Courts Enable Democratic Gerrymandering by Refusing Pre-Election Constitutional Review
Source: Breccan F. Thies. "VA Court Can't Say If Dem Gerrymander Is Illegal Until After They Try It." March 4, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that Virginia courts are helping Democrats cheat by refusing to decide whether their redistricting referendum is legal until after the vote happens. Since courts rarely overturn elections after the fact, this timing effectively guarantees the Democrats will get away with what the author sees as illegal gerrymandering.
Conclusion
Virginia courts are effectively enabling Democratic gerrymandering by refusing to rule on constitutional challenges before the referendum election takes place
Premises
- The Virginia circuit court dismissed constitutional challenges to the referendum on timing grounds, not on the merits of the case
- Courts are extremely unlikely to overturn election results even if they later determine the election itself was illegal
- Democrats may have violated the constitutional 90-day submission timeline for constitutional amendments
- The referendum would allow Democrats to redraw congressional maps to eliminate four Republican seats, creating a 10-1 Democratic advantage
- Republicans lack the resources and organization to effectively counter the Democratic campaign effort
Assumptions
- Courts should rule on constitutional challenges before elections rather than after
- The 90-day constitutional timeline was indeed violated by Democrats
- Post-election constitutional challenges are ineffective remedies
- The proposed redistricting constitutes illegal gerrymandering rather than legitimate redistricting