quote:

A little quick math, for the curious

Total vote difference:
1,574,509 (yes) – 1,485,658 (no) = 88,851

Mail-in vote difference:
215,896 (yes) – 82,266 (no) = 133,630

Make of that what you will.

Without the Mail-in vote it was defeated.

True.

Interesting, though, that some 14% of the YES votes were mail-in, versus about 5% of the NO votes.

https://x.com/KenCuccinelli/st.../2046763761264984137



The "yes" vote has won Va's redistricting referendum — but the legal fight is just beginning. Four Va Constitutional challenges are now teed up:

THREE challenges to the amendment process itself:
1. First passage was invalid. The amendment was taken up during a special session convened in 2024 for budget purposes. The General Assembly's own call to the Governor (under Art. IV, §6 and Art. V, §5) and its governing resolution (HJR 6001) limited the session's scope. Expanding it to include a constitutional amendment on redistricting required a two-thirds vote that never occurred. A Tazewell County judge found this action "void, ab initio."
2. Art. XII, §1 requires that after first passage, a proposed amendment be "referred to the General Assembly at its first regular session held after the next general election of members of the House of Delegates." An election must intervene between first and second passage. Here, first passage occurred during an election cycle — not before an intervening one.
3. Art. XII, §1 requires the amendment be submitted to voters "not sooner than ninety days after final passage by the General Assembly." The timeline from second passage to the April 21 vote did not satisfy this requirement.
Plus ONE challenge to the proposed maps:
4. Art. II, §6 requires that "every electoral district shall be composed of contiguous and compact territory." The proposed congressional maps violate this contiguity requirement (rather badly).

Next stop, court. Stay tuned.

So do today's districting hold through the '26 midterms until the legal challenges are resolved?

The redistricting (though labeled "temporary") holds through at least 2030 -- long enough to outlast the Trump administration.

Now, whether it takes hold immediately (legal challenges notwithstanding), I'm not sure.

But the short answer to your question, Ripley, I believe is "yes."

That was their planned goal from the beginning, I believe, vthoky. Hope to get them beyond DJT's term. Then made permanent. I could almost wretch hearing BHO on all those annoying ads saying that it was just "temporary".

Elections do have consequences, VA's 2024 Presidential election saw 4.5 million voter turnout, VA doesn't report by party, but 44% went for Trump or just shy of 2 million votes.

For this election 1.486 million voted no , so 400K R voters didn't vote, and 100K of those showing up would have stopped it..... Hopefully the courts do fix it for VA.

Just doing the math, point is that this is a problem in off presidential election years we need to address, everywhere.


We're happy we have DeSantis, here he is taking on Dollar Store Obama.... looks like we'll be RedDistricting

https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/2047020226785493096

UPDATE!

https://x.com/nicksortor/status/2047044321497477271

Excellent news.

There are at least three lawsuits pending. This never should’ve been allowed in the first place as it violates the VA constitution solely due to the fact that the required timeframe was not possible.

SCOTUS should get around to ruling on it in about December2026 -January 2027. Maybe February.


.

Add'l info.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...OrC3sVRurowy9hBKo%3D

Judge Rules Virginia Redistricting Referendum Unconstitutional

The state attorney general says he will appeal the decision.

A Virginia judge ruled on Wednesday that the state’s redistricting referendum approved by voters a day earlier was invalid, nullifying the election results.
Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones said he would immediately file an appeal.

“Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People’s vote,” Jones said in an X post.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Jay Jones should just threaten to kill the judge and the judges family.

quote:

“Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People’s vote,” Jones said in an X post.

How the turn tables.

quote:

“Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People’s vote,” Jones said in an X post.

As if Jones suddenly cares about actual voters.

More...

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfr...dkt_nbr=010502qo7gjd

Judge Halts Certification of Virginia Map Referendum

A Virginia judge on Wednesday voided a closely watched congressional redistricting referendum and permanently blocked the state from certifying the results, ruling the entire process unconstitutional.

In his ruling, Tazewell County Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley sided with Republican plaintiffs and declared the amendment and enabling legislation "void ab initio," citing multiple violations of the Virginia Constitution.

The ruling also permanently enjoins state officials from certifying the results of Tuesday's special election or taking any steps to implement the proposed congressional map.

Attorney General Jay Jones said the state "will immediately" appeal to the state Court of Appeals.

"As I said last night, Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People's vote," Jones said in a statement posted on X. "We look forward to defending the outcome of last night's election in court."

The decision escalates a monthslong legal fight over the Democrat-backed effort to redraw Virginia's congressional districts mid-decade, a move Republicans argued was unlawful and politically motivated.

Hurley's order laid out a sweeping rebuke of the process used by the Democrat-controlled General Assembly.

The court found the amendment violated constitutional requirements governing how amendments must be passed, including the requirement that two legislative approvals be separated by a House of Delegates election, which cannot occur until 2027.

It also ruled lawmakers failed to follow statutory procedures, including requirements for public notice and timing.

In addition, the judge found the ballot question itself was "flagrantly misleading" and did not accurately describe the amendment approved by lawmakers.

The order further held that the legislation improperly combined multiple subjects, violated restrictions on local election laws, and required early voting before the constitutionally mandated 90-day window had elapsed.

Based on those findings, the court declared all votes cast in the referendum "ineffective."

Beyond invalidating the vote, the ruling bars the state from taking any action to implement new districts tied to the amendment. That includes updating voter registration records, changing precincts or polling places, printing ballots under new maps, or using any new districts in upcoming primaries or general elections.

The judge also found the plaintiffs would suffer "irreparable harm" without an injunction, including potential disruption to sitting members of Congress whose districts could have been altered mid-cycle.

The referendum, narrowly approved by voters, would have temporarily shifted redistricting authority from Virginia's bipartisan commission to the Democrat-controlled legislature through 2030.

Supporters argued the change was needed to counter Republican-led redistricting in other states.

Opponents called it a partisan power grab that bypassed constitutional safeguards designed to prevent gerrymandering.

"This is another example of Democrats being angry at Republicans for things they are guilty of actually doing," former Trump campaign national press secretary Hogan Gidley told Newsmax on Tuesday. "Seven of the 10 most gerrymandered states in this country are Democrat, and in 16 of the 20 least gerrymandered states in this country are Republican states.

"The whole thing is a scam."

The stakes extend beyond Virginia. Analysts have said a new map could have shifted several congressional seats, potentially affecting the balance of power in Washington, where Republicans hold a narrow majority. Democrats hold six of Virginia's 11 House seats, but the new maps could possibly give them 10.

The Virginia Supreme Court previously allowed the referendum to proceed while litigation continued, setting the stage for the current clash.

With certification now blocked and the amendment struck down, the case is expected to move quickly on appeal, leaving uncertainty over whether any redistricting changes will take effect before the 2026 elections.

Three cheers for Judge Hurley!

quote:

Originally posted by ss9961:
Jay Jones should just threaten to kill the judge and the judges family.

I would bet that 2 bullets Jones has been told to STFU

quote:

Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People’s vote,” Jones said in an X post.

Really asshole? Welcome to the party. How’s it feel? Go suck some balls.

quote:

Originally posted by vthoky:

quote:

“Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People’s vote,” Jones said in an X post.

As if Jones suddenly cares about actual voters.

Or the Constitution...ANY Constitution, be it the Virginia Constitution or the U.S. Constitution!