The Virginia Supreme Court has struck down a Democratic-backed redistricting plan that would have significantly reshaped the state’s congressional map, ruling that lawmakers failed to follow constitutional procedures required to place the measure before voters.
The decision keeps Virginia’s current district lines in place and preserves the existing 6–5 partisan split between Democrats and Republicans in the state’s congressional delegation.
At the center of the ruling was a procedural dispute over timing in the constitutional amendment process.
The court said lawmakers did not complete required steps in the proper order when advancing the redistricting measure tied to the referendum, pointing in particular to the fact that early voting in the 2025 election cycle had already begun before key legislative approvals were finalized, according to WSET.
Writing for the majority, Justice D. Arthur Kelsey said the General Assembly failed to comply with Article XII of the Virginia Constitution, which governs how amendments must be passed before being placed on the ballot.
The court noted that more than a million ballots had already been cast when the legislature took its final action on the proposal, concluding that the timing flaw undermined the legality of the entire process.
The ruling described the defect as one that “incurably taints” the referendum and renders it without legal effect.
The decision effectively nullifies the voter-approved referendum and restores Virginia’s existing congressional boundaries.
Those lines leave Democrats holding six seats and Republicans five, a balance that will remain unchanged heading into upcoming election cycles unless new legislation or court rulings intervene.
Republican officials quickly welcomed the ruling, arguing it reinforces the principle that constitutional procedures cannot be bypassed for political advantage.
GOP leaders said the case was less about the substance of the map and more about whether lawmakers followed the legal framework required for constitutional amendments, regardless of electoral outcomes, according to NBC News.
State Sen. Ryan T. McDougle said the court’s decision affirms a basic standard of constitutional governance, emphasizing that lawmakers must adhere strictly to the process laid out in state law.
Republican lawmakers and allied groups described the ruling as a rejection of what they viewed as an attempt to fast-track a politically favorable map through procedural shortcuts.
Democratic officials pushed back sharply.
Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones criticized the ruling, arguing the court misinterpreted state law in a way that overrides the will of voters who narrowly approved the referendum.
He said his office is reviewing potential legal avenues, describing the decision as a setback for efforts to reshape representation through voter-driven redistricting reforms.
Jones also argued that the ruling reflects a broader legal and political conflict over how redistricting authority should be exercised in the state, particularly after voters approved changes intended to adjust how congressional lines are drawn.
He said the court’s interpretation undermines that process and raises questions about how voter-backed constitutional amendments can be implemented going forward.
Republicans, however, maintained that the issue was never about political preference but constitutional compliance.
They argued that even widely supported ballot measures must meet strict procedural requirements before they can take effect, warning that loosening those standards would weaken the integrity of Virginia’s constitutional amendment process.
The ruling comes amid broader national redistricting battles, as states continue to redraw congressional maps that could influence control of the U.S. House in future election cycles.
Virginia’s case drew particular attention because the proposed map was expected to significantly shift the balance of power depending on how districts were ultimately configured.
With the decision now in effect, Virginia’s existing congressional map remains unchanged, closing off what would have been a major political realignment ahead of upcoming elections.
The ruling also leaves unresolved broader questions about how far states can go in using voter referendums and constitutional amendments to restructure congressional boundaries.
WATCH:
