The Supreme Court of Virginia ruled 4-3 on Friday to overturn Virginia’s mid-decade redistricting referendum after finding the effort unconstitutional.
In the opinion, written by Justice D. Arthur Kelsey, the high court found that the legislative process employed to advance the redistricting referendum violated Article XII, Section 1, of the state constitution. It said that the constitutional violation “incurably taints the resulting referendum vote and nullifies its legal efficacy.”
The court decision all but guarantees the congressional maps used in the 2024 election will be used in the 2026 midterm election.
A constitutional amendment must pass the General Assembly twice, with an intervening election between those two votes, before it goes to the voters in a referendum. The court based its split ruling on whether 45 days of early voting is considered part of the required intervening election.
The General Assembly first passed the constitutional amendment on Oct. 31 by gaveling in the 2024 special session, which had never been adjourned. That Oct. 31 passage took place amid early voting for the 2025 general election. The second passage of the constitutional amendment took place Jan. 19. Both of the General Assembly votes were solidly along party lines.
Supporters of the redistricting referendum argue that the November 2025 election satisfies the “intervening election” requirement because first passage of the constitutional amendment by the General Assembly took place before Election Day. Opponents argue that the election was already underway because early voting had begun on Sept. 19.
“Today’s ruling is well reasoned and in accordance with the constitution of Virginia,” Sen. Bill Stanley, R-Franklin County, a plaintiff in the case, said in a phone interview. “Today, the Supreme Court spoke for the people of Virginia, to make sure that millions of Virginians were not disenfranchised and their voices silenced. It is a great day for Virginia. … We didn’t do this for political reasons, we did this because it was the right thing to do.”
Stanley added that he does not like the mid-decade congressional redistricting that is taking place in other states, but that he’s glad that the Virginia Supreme Court stood up and said that the commonwealth’s constitution matters.
Virginia Democrats have called the redistricting effort necessary, after Republican President Donald Trump called on conservative-led states to change their congressional maps in favor of GOP candidates ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. A number of Republican-led states including Texas, North Carolina and Missouri have redrawn their maps in an effort to give Republicans an advantage in picking up seats in the midterm elections. Democratic states including California have done the same for their party in response.
Virginia’s congressional map had been redrawn to favor Democrats in 10 of its 11 congressional districts, which would have allowed the party to pick up four seats. Virginia’s current congressional map has six Democratic representatives and five Republican representatives.
House of Delegates Minority Leader Terry Kilgore, also a plaintiff in the case, said in a statement that the ruling upholds Virginia’s constitution.
“The rule of law requires that Virginians have an opportunity to review a Constitutional Amendment before they vote for the House of Delegates in a meaningful way. You cannot violate the Constitution to amend the Constitution,” he said.
House Speaker Don Scott, D-Portsmouth, who supported the redistricting effort and was an appellee in the case, said that he respects the decision of the state’s high court.
“Three million people voted in a free and fair election. We gave this decision to the voters — exactly where it belongs — and they spoke loud and clear. They voted YES because they wanted to fight back against the Trump power grab,” he said in a statement. “That truth doesn’t change because of a court ruling. This was always about more than one election – it was about whether the voices of the people matter. And no decision can erase what Virginians made clear at the ballot box.”
A statement by Democratic Attorney General Jay Jones took a different tone, however. The court’s ruling “follows a dangerous trend of tilting power away from the people,” he said, and silences the voices of voters who cast their ballots in favor of the referendum. He added that his office is reviewing the order and is evaluating “every legal pathway forward to defend the will of the people and protect the integrity of Virginia’s elections.”
“Today the Supreme Court of Virginia has chosen to put politics over the rule of law by issuing a ruling that overturns the April 21st special election on redistricting,” he said. “The Republican-led majority of the Supreme Court of Virginia contorted the plain language of the Constitution and Code of Virginia to give it a meaning that was never intended, which allowed them to reach the wrong legal conclusion that fit their political agenda. The consequences of their error are grave.”
The state Supreme Court heard oral arguments over the constitutional validity of the redistricting effort on April 28, as Jones’ office appealed an earlier ruling by the Tazewell County Circuit Court that determined the effort to be unconstitutional.
Tazewell County Circuit Judge Jack Hurley Jr. ruled in January that the process used by General Assembly Democrats to enact the amendment was unconstitutional based on three arguments. Jones appealed that ruling to the state Supreme Court.
The three main questions in the case before the Supreme Court were:
- Whether the 2024 special session was valid and active when the General Assembly took up the redistricting amendment in its first passage in October 2025;
- Whether or not the 45-day early voting period is part of the “intervening election” needed to amend the constitution; and
- Whether a legislative requirement to post the amendment for three months on courthouse grounds is still applicable in 2026.
The State Board of Elections had a prescheduled meeting for May 1 at which it planned to certify the referendum, but the board was unable to do so after it was bound by another Tazewell County court ruling that halted the process. Certification of the referendum is required by state law to take place 14 days after the election concluded.
This is a breaking news post that will be updated.
