Virginia Redistricting Efforts Blocked – For Now

In the wake of the Old Dominion referendum to make a more Democrat-friendly House map on Tuesday, April 21, legal challenges began to mount. Late Wednesday, the first of these efforts claimed a legal win. Virginia Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley ruled that the vote was unconstitutional and that the requirements for a referendum were not met.

Hurley has barred – for now – election officials from proceeding with new maps and modifying districts. The backlash was both immediate and striking.

We’ve Heard This Accusation Before

Commonwealth Attorney General Jay Jones issued a scathing rebuke, saying "Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People's vote. … We look forward to defending the outcome of [the] election in court."

It seems that the designation of judges as “activists” has now crossed the political divide. But the merits of Judge Hurley’s ruling and of other legal challenges to the referendum may be a little harder to dismiss. Hurley wrote that the way the special election was put together violated aspects of Virginia’s Constitution, specifically regarding how such amendments must be approved and submitted to voters.

Furthermore, he called the ballot language “flagrantly misleading” and said it did not accurately describe the measure to potential voters. Here’s what the question presented:

“Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia’s standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?”

The issue appears to be the one-sided position that a “yes” vote would restore fairness. But this is not the only challenge wending its way through the court system.

A Matter of Process

Former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, a Republican, said there were four challenges currently before the courts, three of which directly tackle the amendment process. Speaking to CNN’s Scott Jennings on Wednesday, he said:

"Virginia has a process to amend its constitution that has the General Assembly pass a proposed amendment and then have a state election — an intervening election — where the new House of Delegates was elected and so forth. And then that new General Assembly comes back and has to pass the exact same amendment." 

He set out the problem, saying, "The General Assembly passed the amendment for the first time — called first passage, very creative — on Halloween. Well, these same Democrats, five years ago, gave us a 45-day election. So, voting began September 19 of 2025. Over a million people had already voted before first passage, and they want to treat that election as the intervening election. They're going to have a very difficult time with that."

Each challenge, including the one to Judge Hurley’s decision, will continue through the court system, and while the fact that voters have already cast their ballots may weigh heavily against the plaintiffs, there is precedent for overturning such measures.

In 1958, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled in Carlisle v. Hassan that voters in a referendum had approved an unconstitutional law, and the result was eventually struck down. Ultimately, this issue will be decided not by the ballots cast in Tuesday’s referendum, but by the seven votes of the Virginia Supreme Court.