{"id":2595972,"date":"2026-04-28T07:23:02","date_gmt":"2026-04-28T11:23:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/to-virginia-supreme-court-democrats-lawyer-admits-gerrymandering-vote-is-irrelevant\/"},"modified":"2026-04-28T07:25:30","modified_gmt":"2026-04-28T11:25:30","slug":"to-virginia-supreme-court-democrats-lawyer-admits-gerrymandering-vote-is-irrelevant","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/to-virginia-supreme-court-democrats-lawyer-admits-gerrymandering-vote-is-irrelevant\/","title":{"rendered":"Democrats&#8217; Lawyer Admits VA Gerrymandering Vote Is Irrelevant"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">16<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fto-virginia-supreme-court-democrats-lawyer-admits-gerrymandering-vote-is-irrelevant%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2595972&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>During oral argument before the Virginia Supreme Court, the lawyer defending democrats\u2019 controversial gerrymandering effort conceded that the referendum\u2019s final vote tally isn\u2019t relevant to whether the measure violates constitutional and procedural requirements. Justice Wesley Russell pressed attorney Matthew A.Seligman on the point, citing an <a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/3YuVZYV\" >older decision indicating courts shouldn\u2019<\/a>t weigh procedural irregularities before the public vote has occurred-undercutting the argument that challengers are merely trying to overturn election results.<\/p>\n<p>Seligman also argued that a lower court interfered with the democratic process by halting it, and that the Supreme Court correctly stopped that disruption by delaying certain constitutional challenges until after the vote.Former Republican Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli described that delay as consistent with long-standing precedent that treats the vote as the last step in the legislative process for initiating challenges.<\/p>\n<p>Cuccinelli further criticized the closeness of the referendum outcome and suggested the \u201cyes\u201d side had not built a persuasive margin that would strongly sway justices. He said multiple related lawsuits are moving quickly, with some focused on how the referendum was adopted and others on the constitutionality of the district maps themselves.One major issue is whether Virginia followed its constitution\u2019s requirement that a referendum pass through two different General Assemblies-requiring an intervening election between initial passage phases-especially given that Democrats called a special session and had <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/virginia-sees-record-early-voting-numbers-ahead-of-gubernatorial-election\/\" title=\"... Sees Record Early Voting Numbers Ahead of Gubernatorial ...\">voters cast early ballots<\/a> before knowing the referendum\u2019s final status.<\/p>\n<p>The arguments also addressed what counts as the required \u201cintervening election\u201d or timing relative to Election Day, including whether votes cast early should be considered alongside constitutional strictures. Cuccinelli predicted the court will likely resolve the procedural and constitutional questions first, perhaps making later map-based challenges moot if the referendum adoption is upheld or rejected on those grounds.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<p>The lawyer defending the Democrats\u2019 gerrymandering effort in Virginia admitted to the state Supreme Court on Monday that the vote count has no bearing on the constitutional problems with the referendum. The admission undercuts one of the primary arguments from Attorney General Jay Jones, D-Va., whose office is defending the gerrymander, that the court cannot overturn the results of an election.<\/p>\n<p>During <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/VaNewsVanguard\/status\/2048793834251821481?s=20\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">oral argument<\/a> before the Virginia Supreme Court, attorney Matthew A. Seligman, arguing on behalf of the Democrats controlling Virginia and in favor of gerrymandering, was forced to admit that the final vote count passing gerrymandering does not matter, after questioning from Justice Wesley Russell. Seligman, who is a member of a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vacourts.gov\/static\/courts\/scv\/2026_docket_sched\/04_docket_ss.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">large group of attorneys<\/a> Jones\u2019 office hired as outside legal counsel, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=zAGcdIwJtxM\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">attempted to make the argument<\/a> that the plaintiffs opposed to the gerrymander are now attempting to \u201coverturn the results of that democratic process [the vote].\u201d <\/p>\n<p>\u201cI don\u2019t understand that as a legal argument,\u201d Russell interjected, \u201cgiven that you asked us to invoke our <span>ironically-enough-named<em> Scott <\/em><\/span>decision from over 100 years ago that specifically says you don\u2019t deal with any potential procedural irregularities before the people have voted. So, saying that the people have voted yes after having said you don\u2019t even look as to whether there\u2019s a procedural irregularity \u2026 doesn\u2019t add anything to the equation, does it?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Seligman responded \u201cno,\u201d adding that the court should not accept the plaintiffs\u2019 arguments on the merits. Russell once again interjected, \u201cBut the fact that there\u2019s a \u2018yes\u2019 vote doesn\u2019t tell us anything about those merits.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cUh, no, it does not,\u201d Seligman said.<\/p>\n<p>Seligman also argued that the Tazewell Circuit Court \u201cattempted to interfere with that democratic process by halting it\u201d and asserted that the Supreme Court \u201cproperly put a stop to that.\u201d (The Tazewell court has consistently ruled against the gerrymandering scheme given significant constitutional and procedural concerns, and it immediately <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wsls.com\/news\/local\/2026\/04\/22\/judge-blocks-redistricting-certification-amid-ongoing-lawsuits\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">blocked<\/a> certification of the final vote after April 21.) Seligman was referring to the Supreme Court delaying constitutional challenges to the ballot initiative until after a vote had taken place.<\/p>\n<p>In a <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/ETI_now\/status\/2048777163210719587?s=20\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">briefing<\/a> Monday morning about the oral arguments, former Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, R-Va., noted this delay is in line with longstanding precedent that considers the vote the final step in the legislative procedure required to initiate a challenge. He also likened the vote to the signature of a governor or president on legislation. The signature is the thing that puts the law into effect, and it is not challengeable until that process is completed.<\/p>\n<p>During the call, Cuccinelli said, \u201cThe attorney general\u2019s own lawyer completely undercut the public stance of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/blm-leaders-slam-adam-schiff-urge-newsom-not-to-appoint-him-as-ca-attorney-general\/\" title=\"BLM Leaders Slam Adam Schiff, Urge Newsom Not To Appoint Him As CA Attorney General\">current attorney general<\/a>,\u201d adding, \u201cthe only <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2026\/04\/24\/va-gerrymander-language-is-so-dishonest-dems-refuse-to-defend-it-in-court\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">defense<\/a> that I\u2019ve heard him offer is, \u2018Well, the will of the people \u2014 his 51.5 to 48.5 vote \u2014 will of the people.&#8217;\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Outside the legal and constitutional questions at hand, Cuccinelli suspected \u201cthe Democrats were probably counting on a much bigger margin and hoping that that would weigh heavily emotionally on the justices\u2019 minds as they considered these questions. But it was a very close vote, particularly when the \u2018yes\u2019 side outspent the \u2018no\u2019 side by three- or four-to-one. So even in persuasive effect, I don\u2019t think that vote is going to matter.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The case the Virginia Supreme Court heard Monday has been fast-tracked, given the nature of the case and that it is an election year, Cuccinelli said. The high court knows the problem with the maps needs to be dealt with well before the midterms in November, and Cuccinelli said it was \u201cthe fastest\u201d the state high court had moved on anything in his experience.<\/p>\n<p>Three cases are percolating that challenge gerrymandering in Virginia, Cuccinelli noted. Two relate to the referendum, and one deals with the constitutionality of the physical maps of the gerrymandered districts. Whether the procedure and methods Democrats used to pass the measure are constitutional is the central question.<\/p>\n<p>The court Monday heard challenges to the referendum as passed in 2025. Virginia\u2019s constitution requires any referendum to be passed by two different General Assemblies before being presented to voters, mandating an intervening election of the legislature to give the voting public a chance to kick out legislators if citizens do not like a referendum that went through the initial passage phase.<\/p>\n<p>The intervening election procedure is another major focus of the case heard Monday. While Democrats passed the referendum on Oct. 31, 2025, and there was an election just four days later on Nov. 4, the challenge <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courthousenews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/scott-v-mcdougal-respondent-brief.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">notes<\/a> that Virginia\u2019s 45-day early voting season had already been well underway by Nov. 4, and that voters had no idea they would be voting for or against a ballot referendum until <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vpap.org\/elections\/early-voting\/2025-november-general-election\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">more than 1.3 million votes had already been cast<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Democrats rigged even that process, however, by calling a special session in October 2025, completing the first passage of the referendum on Halloween. One primary concern for the plaintiffs is that a special session is inherently \u201cspecial\u201d for a reason, Cuccinelli said. The parameters of a special session are limited to how it was called, whereas a regular session can deal with anything. In 2025, the special session was limited to the budget and some minor memorial resolutions \u2014 not voting or a referendum.<\/p>\n<p>Changing the parameters of a special session requires a two-thirds vote of the General Assembly, which never occurred, Cuccinelli noted. The Democrats passed the gerrymandering referendum anyway. That undermines the purpose of the intervening election procedure, but the pro-gerrymandering side maintains that the \u201celection\u201d means Election Day itself, not the first days the polls are open.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWhat is your position \u2014 your client\u2019s position \u2014 regarding a constitutional amendment that is adopted at 6 p.m. on Election Day with an hour left at the polls? Is that the next general, is that still the next general election?\u201d one of the justices <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nbcnews.com\/politics\/2026-election\/virginia-supreme-court-weighs-legality-democratic-redistricting-plan-rcna342226\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">asked<\/a> of Virginia Solicitor General Tillman Breckenridge.<\/p>\n<p>Breckenridge said the Virginia government\u2019s position is that the first passage of the amendment must come before Election Day, not on it, which still leaves open the possibility that it could come the day just before Election Day.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe lawyer for the commonwealth trying to keep the referendum for the Democrats, in addressing the question of the fact that over a million voters had already voted in 2025 when first passage of the proposed amendment occurred, he said, \u2018Look, voters who vote early vote at their own risk.\u2019 It was shockingly blas\u00e9 \u2014 that they risk missing out on some October surprise,\u201d Cuccinelli said.<\/p>\n<p>Looking at the landscape of the lawsuits percolating, and \u201creading the tea leaves,\u201d Cuccinelli said that the court would not likely get to any lawsuit regarding maps unless they decide in favor of the Democrats on the constitutional, procedural, and statutory issues first. If they decide against, the maps would be moot as a result.<\/p>\n<p>He also said that the issues before the court in the first lawsuit, dealing with the 2025 procedural issues, is probably the strongest one. If the Supreme Court decides to \u201cincredibly fast\u201d on the appeal of the Tazewell court decision blocking certification, as opposed to waiting on it for a bit, it could indicate that the court does not intend to decide the case based on the issues presented in the first lawsuit. <\/p>\n<p>Since the issues involved are state rather than federal, Cuccinelli noted, the Supreme Court of Virginia \u201cis going to decide this, not the Supreme Court of the United States.\u201d<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>      Breccan F. Thies is the White House correspondent for The Federalist. He is a co-recipient of the 2025 Dao Prize for Excellence in Investigative Journalism. As an investigative journalist, he previously covered education and culture issues for the Washington Examiner and Breitbart News. He holds a degree from the University of Virginia and is a 2022 Claremont Institute Publius Fellow. You can follow him on X: @BreccanFThies.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Democrats\u2019 gerrymander lawyer admits vote count can\u2019t fix referendum constitutional issues<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":179,"featured_media":2595973,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Screenshot-2026-04-27-145954.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[33651],"tags":[3685,22850,36218,5468,32570],"class_list":["post-2595972","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-western-journal","tag-democrats","tag-gerrymandering","tag-legal-analysis","tag-virginia","tag-voting-rights"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Screenshot-2026-04-27-145954.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2595972","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/179"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2595972"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2595972\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2595976,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2595972\/revisions\/2595976"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2595973"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2595972"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2595972"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2595972"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}