Virginia’s highest court delivered pointed questioning to Democratic lawyers Monday as Republicans challenge a referendum that could hand Democrats a staggering 10-1 congressional majority through what the Republican National Committee chairman calls a blatant power grab.

Democrats Face Tough Questions on Procedural Violations

The Virginia Supreme Court heard oral arguments challenging a redistricting referendum that narrowly passed last week with 51.6 percent of the vote. Republicans argue the Democrat-led General Assembly violated constitutional requirements to get the measure on the ballot. State law requires lawmakers to approve a constitutional amendment resolution in two consecutive legislative sessions with an election between them. Democrats claim they satisfied this requirement by resuming a 2024 special session in 2025, but Republicans contend a special session cannot count as two separate sessions under Virginia law.

Adding to Republican concerns, the legislature’s first vote occurred in October while early voting was already underway, meaning no election separated the two required sessions. The General Assembly also failed to publish the proposed amendment 90 days in advance as required, then retroactively repealed that regulation. Lower courts have already expressed skepticism about whether Democrats followed proper procedures. During arguments, justices immediately dismissed Democratic lawyer Matthew Seligman’s claim about respecting voter will and instead focused on procedural irregularities. Fewer than half of the seven justices asked questions, but those who did pressed Democrats on technical compliance issues.

Massive Power Shift Hangs in the Balance

The referendum temporarily allows the state legislature to redraw congressional districts instead of the constitutionally mandated bipartisan commission. Virginia currently has six Democrats and five Republicans in its congressional delegation. Under the new legislative map, Democrats could secure favorable conditions for a 10-1 split, potentially gaining four seats. Republican attorney Thomas McCarthy argued voters across Virginia deserve time to understand such significant changes. He emphasized that citizens not closely following Richmond politics need adequate notice before voting on constitutional amendments that could reshape their representation.

What Happens Next

Democrats maintain the Virginia Supreme Court should not interfere with legislative rules or overturn the expressed will of voters based on procedural technicalities. Courts rarely throw out referendum results, making this challenge particularly significant. The case tests whether constitutional procedural safeguards can be bypassed through creative legislative maneuvering, even when a referendum passes. The court’s decision will determine whether Democrats can proceed with their redistricting plan or whether the existing bipartisan commission process remains in effect, preserving the current competitive congressional landscape in Virginia.