{"id":2604368,"date":"2026-05-19T08:51:57","date_gmt":"2026-05-19T12:51:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/by-democrats-standards-virginia-redistricting-lawyers-should-lose-their-jobs-licenses-and-life-savings\/"},"modified":"2026-05-19T09:04:43","modified_gmt":"2026-05-19T13:04:43","slug":"by-democrats-standards-virginia-redistricting-lawyers-should-lose-their-jobs-licenses-and-life-savings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/by-democrats-standards-virginia-redistricting-lawyers-should-lose-their-jobs-licenses-and-life-savings\/","title":{"rendered":"By Dems&#8217; Standards, VA Redistricting Lawyers Should Be Pariahs"},"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\">18<\/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%2Fby-democrats-standards-virginia-redistricting-lawyers-should-lose-their-jobs-licenses-and-life-savings%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=2604368&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>the passage argues that the legal and political fallout from john Eastman\u2019s role in the 2020 election dispute was driven by a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/gop-senators-say-trumps-acquittal-in-impeachment-trial-is-assured\/\" title=\"GOP Senators Say Trump\u2019s Acquittal in Impeachment Trial Is Assured\">partisan double standard<\/a>, and that recent Democratic strategies in Virginia reveal the same kind of \u201cconstitutional lawfare\u201d being judged far more leniently when used by the \u201ccorrect\u201d faction.<\/p>\n<p>It contrasts Eastman\u2019s approach-creating constitutional memoranda arguing that Vice President Pence could delay or reject contested electoral votes-with what the author says Virginia Democrats discussed after Virginia\u2019s Supreme Court struck down a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/marjorie-taylor-greene-says-jasmine-crockett-mistreats-staff-amid-rumors\/\" title=\"Marjorie Taylor Greene says Jasmine Crockett mistreats staff amid rumors\">congressional map favored<\/a> by them. according to the passage, those discussions reportedly included changing the retirement age of Virginia Supreme Court justices in a way designed to remove the entire bench and replace it with more favorable judges, effectively letting politics purge an autonomous court rather than persuading it.<\/p>\n<p>The author claims the rhetoric used in the Virginia case was openly militant-describing the conflict as \u201cmaximum warfare\u201d-and notes that media outlets and political leaders framed the plan as audacious or necesary rather than as an assault on democracy, as they had done with comparable proposals from Republicans. The passage also contends that Virginia Democrats\u2019 legal filings to the U.S. Supreme Court were quickly rejected, yet were later used as a pretext to criticize the court.<\/p>\n<p>it emphasizes the legal-professional dimension: Eastman,the author says,was disbarred on the view that his constitutional aggression endangered democracy,while lawyers involved in the Virginia efforts faced no comparable backlash. The passage concludes that the true determinant was political allegiance-aggressive constitutional maneuvering done for the right led to professional destruction, while similar or more extreme maneuvering done for the left is treated as legitimate \u201cdemocratic self-defense.\u201d  <\/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>Democrats\u2019 legal strategy in the Virginia redistricting dispute, if measured against the standards they imposed on Republicans, would warrant the professional ruin of everyone involved. The contrast is most directly illustrated by the case of John Eastman, a constitutional scholar and lawyer for President Trump who authored two memoranda outlining constitutional theories related to the disputed 2020 election.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Eastman\u2019s career was presented as constitutional self-defense. He was not merely portrayed as a lawyer advancing flawed arguments under unprecedented political circumstances, but as someone who had crossed an impermissible line. He was stripped of his law license, financially devastated, and cast as a \u201cthreat to democracy.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Yet only a few years later, many of the same political and media institutions that demanded Eastman\u2019s destruction are now defending, minimizing, or simply ignoring conduct that is functionally similar in principle and significantly more aggressive in practice.<\/p>\n<p>The Virginia redistricting dispute, and particularly the extraordinary strategies reportedly <a href=\"https:\/\/archive.is\/TZDh7\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">discussed<\/a> by Virginia Democrats, as well as House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and his allies, reveal the scale of the double standard with remarkable clarity. What is unfolding is not just partisan hardball but the normalization of constitutional lawfare, openly justified because it is being undertaken by the \u201ccorrect\u201d political faction.<\/p>\n<h2><strong>The Eastman Standard<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>To understand the comparison, it is important to begin with what Eastman actually did, rather than the caricature that subsequently emerged around him.<\/p>\n<p>Following the 2020 election, Eastman <a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20220115054103\/https:\/www.documentcloud.org\/documents\/21066248-eastman-memo\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">advanced<\/a> the <a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20221109134450\/https:\/www.washingtonpost.com\/context\/john-eastman-s-second-memo-on-january-6-scenario\/b3fd2b0a-f931-4e0c-8bac-c82f13c2dd6f\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">theory<\/a> that Vice President Mike Pence possessed authority under the 12th Amendment to delay or reject disputed electoral votes during the certification process. Critics condemned the theory as historically unsupported and constitutionally unsound. But whatever one thinks of the argument itself, Eastman\u2019s conduct remained fundamentally legalistic in nature. He produced constitutional memoranda advancing an aggressive interpretation of existing constitutional procedures during an unprecedented political crisis. His theory relied upon persuading a constitutional officer, Pence, to adopt a novel reading of existing law.<\/p>\n<p>The argument may have been flawed, but it remained, at its core, an argument about the interpretation of constitutional process.<\/p>\n<p>What has now emerged in Virginia goes considerably further.<\/p>\n<h2><strong>The Virginia Court-Purge Strategy<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>Strategy discussions involving Virginia Democrats, Jeffries, and other Democratic officials <a href=\"https:\/\/archive.is\/TZDh7\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">reportedly<\/a> explored an extraordinary plan after the Virginia Supreme Court invalidated a congressional map favorable to their party. Rather than limiting themselves to appeals, the discussions involved lowering the mandatory retirement age for Virginia Supreme Court justices from 73 to 54, precisely the threshold necessary to immediately remove the entire sitting bench. A temporary legislative majority could then refill the court with sympathetic judges who would reverse the redistricting decision.<\/p>\n<div>\n<p>Eastman was accused of attempting to exploit a procedural ambiguity within an existing constitutional rule. The Virginia strategy contemplates the effective liquidation of an entire branch of government in order to obtain a preferred political result. Eastman sought to persuade a constitutional actor. The Virginia plan seeks to remove the constitutional actors altogether and replace them with more compliant ones.<\/p>\n<p>One can reasonably argue that Eastman advanced an unsound constitutional theory while still recognizing that what is being contemplated in Virginia represents a far more direct assault on institutional integrity itself. If legislatures may retroactively manipulate retirement rules in order to purge courts that issue politically inconvenient rulings, then judicial independence effectively ceases to exist as a meaningful constitutional principle. Courts become temporary instruments of legislative majorities rather than independent constitutional bodies.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>What makes the comparison to Eastman even more revealing is the rhetoric surrounding the effort. According to reporting, Jeffries <a href=\"https:\/\/archive.is\/TZDh7\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">framed<\/a> the situation in apocalyptic terms, declaring that Democrats needed to engage in \u201cmaximum warfare, everywhere, all the time.\u201d Another Democrat warned colleagues that \u201cthis is a complete disaster waiting to happen if people are timid.\u201d This is openly militant political rhetoric attached to discussions about restructuring an <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/democrats-consider-wiping-out-virginia-supreme-court\/\" title=\"Democrats consider wiping out Virginia ...\">entire state supreme court<\/a> in order to reverse an unfavorable ruling.<\/p>\n<div>\n<p>The New York Times <a href=\"https:\/\/archive.is\/TZDh7\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">described<\/a> the plan as an \u201caudacious and possibly far-fetched idea.\u201d Had Republican officials discussed removing sitting judges in order to create a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/exclusive-why-democrats-favorite-formula-for-electoral-maps-is-inherently-crooked\/\" title=\"Exclusive: Democrats&#039; Preferred Electoral Map Formula Is Inherently Biased\">preferred electoral map<\/a>, the media would almost certainly have characterized it as an assault on democracy itself. Had Republicans used comparable language, the reaction would likely have been even more apocalyptic.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, Virginia Democrats petitioned the United States Supreme Court with frivolous <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/DocketPDF\/25\/25A1240\/408563\/20260511151941216_25A%20Application%20for%20Stay.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">arguments<\/a> that were immediately rejected out of hand. Even Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, no stranger to advancing <a href=\"https:\/\/www.documentcloud.org\/documents\/28093312-25a1197-order\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">absurd<\/a> positions, did not register any objection. Unsurprisingly, Virginia Democrats, led by Gov. Abigail Spanberger, used the prompt rejection to <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/GovernorVA\/status\/2055445238835970418\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">chastise<\/a> the court, despite having advanced arguments that were, on their face, legally indefensible.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<h2><strong>Lawfare for Some, Disbarment for Others<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>The role of lawyers in both episodes makes the double standard even more glaring.<\/p>\n<p>Eastman was disbarred on the theory that aggressive constitutional innovation itself represented a profound danger to democracy. Yet the Virginia filings and strategies advanced before the U.S. Supreme Court were themselves signed and defended by lawyers advancing highly novel and institutionally aggressive theories. Those arguments were summarily rejected, but they nevertheless provided Virginia Democrats with a rhetorical platform to <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/GovernorVA\/status\/2055445238835970418\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">attack<\/a> the court after the fact. The lawyers involved advanced legal positions designed to overturn or circumvent settled constitutional structures in pursuit of a political outcome.<\/p>\n<p>And yet no one seriously suggests that these lawyers should lose their licenses. No major media campaign calls for their professional destruction, and no coordinated effort within elite legal circles seeks to render them unemployable, discredited, or morally radioactive in the way Eastman is treated.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, much of the coverage surrounding these efforts has framed them as audacious, creative, or strategically necessary responses to political frustration. The same institutional class that treated Eastman\u2019s constitutional arguments as uniquely disqualifying now treats dramatically more aggressive maneuvering as merely another form of partisan conflict.<\/p>\n<p>The deeper issue exposed by these events is that the Eastman precedent was never really about constitutional novelty as such. American constitutional history is filled with theories once dismissed as absurd before later becoming accepted doctrine. Nor was it truly about institutional hardball, because the Virginia episode plainly involves institutional hardball on a far greater scale.<\/p>\n<p>What ultimately made Eastman unforgivable was that his constitutional aggression was deployed in service of Donald Trump and the political right.<\/p>\n<p>That is the principle now operating in practice.<\/p>\n<p>Aggressive constitutional maneuvering undertaken on behalf of disfavored political causes is treated as disqualifying extremism and ethical misconduct. Comparable or even more radical maneuvering undertaken on behalf of favored political causes is reframed as democratic self-defense.<\/p>\n<p>The Virginia controversy exposes this asymmetry with unusual clarity because it mirrors the precise institutional logic that destroyed Eastman. In both cases, political actors searched for <a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/3YuVZYV\" >latent constitutional leverage points capable<\/a> of overturning an unfavorable outcome. In both cases, lawyers advanced aggressive theories aimed at bypassing ordinary institutional constraints. In both cases, democratic legitimacy was invoked to justify extraordinary constitutional intervention. But only one side faces professional annihilation for doing so.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<div>\n<p>      Hans Mahncke is in-house counsel at a global business advisory firm. He holds LL.B., LL.M. and Ph.D. degrees in law. He is the author of  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Swiftboating-America-Russiagate-Crossfire-Investigation\/dp\/B0FNXCQ8KM\/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.DjUY7RzzAZSNTHfV6s3mDQ.po8ROEXuuEtP_ZSfZOTJoE1AzqwYsCuRG4SGgBJl_7U&#038;dib_tag=se&#038;keywords=%22Swiftboating+America%3A+Exposing+the+Russiagate+Fraud%2C+from+the+Steele+Dossier+to+the+FBI%27s+Crossfire+Hurricane+Investigation.%22&#038;qid=1759949638&#038;sr=8-1\">&#8220;Swiftboating America: Exposing the Russiagate Fraud, from the Steele Dossier to the FBI&#8217;s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation.&#8221;<\/a> <\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Democrats\u2019 Virginia strategy vs Eastman: a double standard in lawfare<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1441,"featured_media":2604369,"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\/05\/SupremeCourtofVirginiaBuilding-e1779129456349.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[33651],"tags":[32923,36913,16985,38033,32570],"class_list":["post-2604368","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-western-journal","tag-democratic-party","tag-legal-ethics","tag-redistricting","tag-virginia-politics","tag-voting-rights"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/SupremeCourtofVirginiaBuilding-e1779129456349.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2604368","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\/1441"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2604368"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2604368\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2604372,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2604368\/revisions\/2604372"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2604369"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2604368"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2604368"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2604368"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}