Virginia Democrats Used Deceptively Worded Ballot Language for Gerrymandering and Won't Defend It in Court
Source: Breccan F. Thies. "VA Dems Won't Defend Dishonest Gerrymander Language In Court." April 24, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that Virginia Democrats tricked voters by using misleading language on a redistricting ballot, claiming it would 'restore fairness' when it actually gave Democrats a huge advantage. The proof is that their own lawyer won't even defend this language in court.
Conclusion
Virginia Democrats deliberately used misleading ballot language to pass their gerrymandering referendum and are now unwilling to defend that deceptive language in court
Premises
- The ballot language claimed the redistricting would 'restore fairness' when it actually shifted districts from 6D-5R to 10D-1R
- Attorney General Jay Jones systematically avoided defending or even quoting the 'restore fairness' phrase in his court motion
- A circuit court judge ruled the ballot language was 'flagrantly misleading' and didn't accurately describe the amendment
- When pressed on CNN, Jones repeatedly dodged questions about the ballot language rather than defending it
- Jones dismissed the problematic language as mere 'rhetorical choices' rather than substantively defending it
Assumptions
- Ballot language should accurately and neutrally describe what voters are deciding
- A lawyer's refusal to quote or defend specific language indicates that language is indefensible
- Shifting from a 6D-5R to 10D-1R delegation constitutes gerrymandering rather than 'restoring fairness'
- Courts have legitimate authority to review ballot language for accuracy and clarity