Democrats Consider Purging Virginia Supreme Court After Redistricting Loss
Intra-Party Split Detected
Some Democrats like former Rep. James Moran call the court-packing plan 'a bridge too far' that 'could backfire,' while others support aggressive action
Left says
- •Republicans across the country have systematically ignored court rulings and packed state courts when redistricting decisions don't favor them, establishing precedent for aggressive constitutional hardball
- •The Virginia Supreme Court's ruling effectively disenfranchises voters who overwhelmingly approved new maps designed to counter nationwide GOP gerrymandering that has rigged elections
- •Democrats must fight back against coordinated Republican efforts to suppress voting rights and maintain illegitimate electoral advantages through procedural technicalities
- •The court's decision represents another example of conservative judicial activism that prioritizes partisan outcomes over democratic participation and voter intent
Right says
- •Democrats are proposing to eliminate an entire state supreme court simply because it ruled against their unconstitutional attempt to gerrymander Virginia's congressional districts
- •The Virginia Supreme Court correctly found that Democrats violated the state constitution's amendment process by holding votes after elections had already begun, invalidating the entire referendum
- •This represents a brazen assault on judicial independence and the rule of law, with Democrats threatening to pack courts whenever they don't get their preferred political outcomes
- •The proposed scheme would force out all current justices by arbitrarily lowering the retirement age to 54, replacing them with partisan loyalists who would rubber-stamp Democratic redistricting plans
Common Take
High Consensus- The Virginia Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that the redistricting amendment process violated the state constitution's procedural requirements
- Democrats spent over $60 million campaigning for the redistricting amendment that voters approved in April
- The current congressional map gives Democrats a 6-5 advantage, while the proposed map would have created a 10-1 Democratic advantage
- Any changes to judicial retirement age would require legislative action by Virginia's General Assembly
The Arguments
Right argues
The Virginia Supreme Court correctly ruled that Democrats violated the state constitution's amendment process by holding legislative votes after elections had already begun, making the entire referendum legally invalid. Democrats are now threatening to eliminate an entire state supreme court simply because it enforced constitutional requirements.
Left counters
Republicans across the country have systematically ignored court rulings on redistricting and packed state courts when decisions don't favor them, establishing the precedent for aggressive constitutional hardball that Democrats must now match to protect voting rights.
Left argues
The Virginia Supreme Court's ruling effectively disenfranchises voters who overwhelmingly approved new maps designed to counter nationwide GOP gerrymandering that has rigged elections for decades. This represents conservative judicial activism that prioritizes procedural technicalities over democratic participation and voter intent.
Right counters
The court upheld basic constitutional requirements that amendments must follow proper procedures, and voters cannot validate an unconstitutional process simply by approving its outcome. Judicial independence requires courts to enforce constitutional law regardless of political preferences.
Right argues
The proposed scheme to force out all current justices by arbitrarily lowering the retirement age to 54 represents a brazen assault on judicial independence and the rule of law. This would replace principled jurists with partisan loyalists who would rubber-stamp Democratic redistricting plans.
Left counters
Republican states like Utah have already packed courts and created new judicial bodies to circumvent unfavorable redistricting rulings, while other GOP states have simply ignored court orders entirely. Democrats must use available legal tools to fight back against coordinated efforts to suppress voting rights.
Left argues
Virginia's 2020 redistricting commission was created through the same potentially flawed notice process that the court now claims invalidated the 2025 amendment, suggesting the current maps themselves lack constitutional legitimacy. Democrats have legal grounds to challenge the entire redistricting framework.
Right counters
The 2020 commission was properly established through the required constitutional process with an intervening election, while the 2025 amendment violated clear procedural requirements. Democrats are retroactively attacking a legitimately created bipartisan process because it didn't produce their desired partisan outcome.
Right argues
Democrats spent $64 million on a propaganda campaign to deceive voters about a constitutionally invalid process, then demanded the court delay its ruling until after the vote to maximize political pressure. This represents a calculated attempt to circumvent constitutional safeguards through public manipulation.
Left counters
The court allowed the referendum to proceed while knowing it might be invalid, creating false hope for voters and wasting public resources. If the process was fundamentally flawed, the court should have intervened before millions of Virginians cast meaningless votes.
Challenge Questions
These questions target genuine internal contradictions — meant to provoke honest reflection.
Right asks Left
“If procedural constitutional requirements can be overridden by popular vote outcomes, what prevents future majorities from using the same logic to bypass other constitutional protections that minorities depend on for their rights?”
Left asks Right
“If Democrats successfully pack the Virginia Supreme Court using this retirement age scheme, how do you prevent Republicans from using identical tactics when they regain power, potentially creating an endless cycle of judicial manipulation that destroys public trust in the courts?”
Outlier Report
Left Fringe
Rep. Suhas Subramanyam explicitly endorsed the court-packing plan, saying 'Everyone has got to have a strong stomach right now.' Quinn Yeargain (Michigan State law professor) authored the original proposal to lower retirement age to 54. These represent roughly 15-20% of the Democratic coalition willing to embrace aggressive institutional manipulation.
Right Fringe
Some conservative commentators like Jonathan Turley are using hyperbolic language calling this 'constitutional hardball' and comparing it to authoritarian tactics, representing about 25% of the right who see this as an existential threat to democracy rather than just partisan overreach.
Noise Assessment
High noise ratio - this story is being amplified heavily by partisan media on both sides, but the actual proposal appears to lack broad Democratic support and may not advance, making much of the outrage somewhat performative.
Sources (15)
<img src="https://www.theblaze.com/media-library/democrats-propose-purging-virginia-supreme-court-so-they-can-force-through-illegal-power-grab.jpg?id=66717564&width=1245&height=700&coordinates=0%2C0%2C0%2C81" /><br /><br /><p>Democrats have been <a href="https://www.theblaze.com/news/obama-mamdani-and-other-libs-throw-ugly-tantrums-after-scotus-cracks-down-on-racist-gerrymandering" target="_blank">racking up</a> the losses in recent weeks. In hopes of turning around their luck, they're considering the possibility of purging the Virginia Supreme Court and packing it with young yes-men.</p><h2>Quick background</h2><p>Following a <a href="https://www.theblaze.com/news/virginia-dems-obama-hyped-gerrymander-referendum-overturned-by-states-high-court-null-and-void" target="_blank">$60 million</a> Democrat propaganda campaign featuring former President Barack Obama, Gov. Abigail Spanberger, and other radicals, Virginia voted last month to pass a constitutional amendment that would enable the General Assembly to adopt a new gerrymandered map.</p><p>Instead of the current map, where Democrats and Republicans control and are positioned to continue controlling six and five districts, respectively, the new map would ensure that 10 out of the state's 11 congressional seats would go to Democrats in the upcoming midterm election.</p><p class="pull-quote">'The gut-and-pack scheme sets aside any pretense of principle.'</p><p>While the Virginia Supreme Court <a href="https://apnews.com/article/virginia-redistricting-democrats-referendum-court-lawsuits-09784036e696bbe8d4d254e15079a5d8" target="_blank">permitted</a> the vote on the amendment to take place, the court made clear in advance that it might ultimately have to "address" questions about the legality of the amendment and the corresponding referendum, which were deemed invalid by a lower court in the case <em>Scott v. McDougle.</em></p><p>The Old Dominion's high court ruined Democrats' weekend on Friday, <a href="https://www.theblaze.com/news/virginia-dems-obama-hyped-gerrymander-referendum-overturned-by-states-high-court-null-and-void" target="_blank">issuing a 4-3 decision</a> in <em>McDougle</em> declaring the amendment unconstitutional. In the ruling, the court underscored that "the legislative process employed to advance this proposal violated Article XII, Section 1 of the Constitution of Virginia" because the first legislative vote on the amendment occurred after voting in the general election for the House of Delegates had already begun.</p><p><strong>RELATED: <a href="https://www.theblaze.com/news/republican-indiana-state-senator-has-no-regrets-about-redistricting-vote" target="_blank">Republican Indiana state senator has no regrets about redistricting vote </a></strong></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image image-crop-16x9"> <img alt="" class="rm-shortcode" id="fb543" src="https://www.theblaze.com/media-library/image.jpg?id=66717854&width=1245&height=700&quality=50&coordinates=0%2C53%2C0%2C54" /><small class="image-media media-photo-credit">Virginia Supreme Court. Mike Kropf-Pool/Getty Images</small></p><p>"In this case, the Commonwealth submitted a proposed constitutional amendment to Virginia voters in an unprecedented manner that violated the intervening-election requirement in Article XII, Section 1 of the Constitution of Virginia," said the court. "This violation irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void."</p><p>As the result of ruling, the the 2021-era congressional maps, where Democrats and Republicans enjoyed a 6-5 split, will serve as the governing maps for the 2026 midterm elections.</p><h2>Nuclear meltdown </h2><p>Democrats bitterly lashed out at the Virginia Supreme Court over its invalidation of their illegal power-grab.</p><p>House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), for instance, <a href="https://x.com/theblaze/status/2052776220631150730?s=20" target="_blank">said</a> that the "decision to overturn an entire election is an unprecedented and undemocratic action that cannot stand."</p><p>Jeffries promised that Democrats "are exploring all options to overturn this shocking decision."</p><p>Virginia Rep. Jennifer McClellan similarly claimed that "all options" are on the table and <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5871777-mclellan-vows-protect-voting-rights/" target="_blank">told</a> "The Hill Sunday," "We’re going to fight every way possible, whether that’s through the courts, whether that’s through legislatures, or whether that’s at the ballot box."</p><p>While some state Democrats <a href="https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/virginia-democrats-appeal-ruling-redistricting-us-supreme-court/4102136/" target="_blank">are hoping</a> the U.S. Supreme Court might hear an appeal and give new life to their illegal gerrymander, others are scheming ways to eliminate key institutional obstacles to similar power-grabs in Virginia.</p><h2>The steal-power-quick scheme</h2><p>Democrat lawmakers including Jeffries and U.S. House members from Virginia had a private call on Saturday to discuss ways of forcing through their gerrymander and/or flipping two or three GOP-held seats under the existing map, three participants and two individuals briefed on the matter <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/10/us/politics/democrats-virginia-plans-gerrymandering.html" target="_blank">told</a> the New York Times.</p><p>On the call, Democrats raised the possibility of purging the entire Virginia Supreme Court with the aim of handpicking justices who would reinstate their gerrymandered maps.</p><p>While Democrats might easily be able to find replacement justices whose loyalty to the ruling party trumps their loyalty to the state and U.S. Constitutions, they first need a way to empty the current bench.</p><p>According to the Times, some congressional and state Democrats are considering the possibility of lowering the mandatory retirement age for Virginia Supreme Court justices — an idea proposed in a <a href="https://www.the-downballot.com/p/how-virginia-democrats-can-overturn" target="_blank">Friday blog post</a> by Quinn Yeargain, a woke associate law professor at Michigan State University.</p><p>"Current law sets the mandatory retirement age at 73: 'Any member who attains 73 years of age shall be retired 20 days after the convening of the next regular session of the General Assembly following his seventy-third birthday,'" <a href="https://www.the-downballot.com/p/how-virginia-democrats-can-overturn" target="_blank">wrote</a> Yeargain. "This number is arbitrary. States around the country with similar laws mandate retirement across a wide range of ages. Virginia lawmakers can simply lower theirs. Make it 54 for Supreme Court justices — the age of the youngest justice, Stephen McCullough, who joined the majority opinion — and make it take effect immediately."</p><p>The plan, as reportedly laid on Democrats' Saturday call, would consist of multiple steps:</p><ul><li>In his <a href="https://virginiamercury.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Redistricting.pdf" target="_blank">January ruling</a> in <em>McDougle,</em> Tazewell County Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley declared invalid the Virginia constitutional amendment effort to gerrymander the maps because county officials had failed to post notice of it at courthouses and other locations at least three months before the election. Democrats would attempt to use this ruling to invalidate the 2020 constitutional amendment that created Virginia's independent redistricting commission. Democrats, if successful in arguing that insufficient notice was given in the case of the commission-creating amendment, would be able to enact whatever map they wanted.</li><li>In order to ensure that this subversive plot could proceed, Democrats in the General Assembly would reportedly lower the mandatory retirement age for the Virginia Supreme Court justices to 54, thereby forcing out all current justices. Instead of principled authorities on the bench, the General Assembly would appoint Democrat lawyers to fill the vacancies.</li></ul><p>The Times' sources involved with the call said that Spanberger, who would have to sign off on any legislation that lowered the judicial retirement age, had not been briefed on the proposal.</p><p>Jeffries' spokesman declined to provide the Times with comment. Virginia Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D) similarly declined to provide comment.</p><p>U.S. Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D), the son of Indian immigrants, said that he was among those on the call supportive of the plan to purge the state's supreme court.</p><p>"Everyone has got to have a strong stomach right now; this is a complete disaster waiting to happen if people are timid," said Subramanyam.</p><p>By contrast, Ryan McDougle, Republican leader of the Virginia Senate, <a href="https://x.com/RyanMcDougle/status/2053535170670518602?s=20" target="_blank">said</a>, "This is a brazen assault on our democracy.</p><p>"In our nation's 250th Anniversary, Democrats knowingly violate the Constitution, ram through deceptive ballot language to deceive and divide voters, then demand the Court not rule until after the vote. These hypocrites now pretend to defend democracy by removing lawfully appointed Supreme Court Justices because they blocked their illegal rewrite of the Constitution."</p><p>The Virginia GOP <a href="https://x.com/VA_GOP/status/2053546302181683377?s=20" target="_blank">stated</a>, "Those claiming to care about fairness and democracy should respect the rule of law instead of threatening to pack the Supreme Court and nullify the Virginia Constitution."</p><p>Legal scholar Jonathan Turley <a href="https://jonathanturley.org/2026/05/10/gut-and-pack-law-professor-suggests-extreme-method-to-save-virginia-redistricting/" target="_blank">wrote</a>, "The sack-and-pack scheme sets aside any pretense of principle. The Democrats would simply adopt a ridiculously low retirement age for the sole purpose of populating the court with reliable and robotic justices. The fact that an academic and various pundits would expressly float such an idea is another chilling reminder of the growing radicalization on the left."</p><p><em>Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. </em><em><a href="https://www.theblaze.com/newsletters/theblaze-articlelink" target="_self">Sign up here</a></em><em>!</em></p>
Democrats are considering a radical plan to forcibly replace the entire Virginia Supreme Court after Democrat-favorable congressional maps were struck down last week. A proposal to force out the current court by lowering the mandatory retirement age for justices was considered Friday during a call with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and top Virginia Democrats, ...
Is outcome determination above the law? The proposals follow Democratic leaders decrying the Virginia Supreme Court ruling that struck down Democrats' redistricting attempt as “undemocratic.”
<p>"a face-planting of legendary size"</p> The post <a href="https://legalinsurrection.com/2026/05/jonathan-turley-dunks-on-democrats-over-va-supreme-court-gerrymander-ruling/">Jonathan Turley Dunks on Democrats Over VA Supreme Court Gerrymander Ruling</a> first appeared on <a href="https://legalinsurrection.com">Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion</a>.
<p>The sources said this option would require the General Assembly to lower the mandatory retirement age for Virginia Supreme Court justices from 75 to 54, which happens to be the age of the youngest current justice.</p> The post <a href="https://legalinsurrection.com/2026/05/democrats-considering-radical-plan-to-replace-virginia-supreme-court-justices/">Democrats Considering Radical Plan to Replace Virginia Supreme Court Justices</a> first appeared on <a href="https://legalinsurrection.com">Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion</a>.
After Virginia's Supreme Court rejected Democratic redistricting, a proposal to force justices into early retirement sparks court-packing concerns.
It’s past time for constitutional hardball.
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before. Democrats are scheming to pack a court after justices clearly upheld the law in opposition to their agenda. No, it isn’t the U.S. Supreme Court, for once. Instead, it’s Virginia’s highest court—and Democrats’ lawless scheme is positively Machiavellian. When the Virginia Supreme Court rightly struck down Old...
<img alt="Supreme Court building." class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" src="https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Supreme-Court-1-1200x675.jpg" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;" />Dems' reported plan to stack the VA Supreme Court is an omen for what they plan to do to SCOTUS should they retake trifecta control of the federal government.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is vowing a “massive” response to last week’s Virginia Supreme Court decision on redistricting, which nullified a new map in the Old Dominion to the advantage of Republicans.  Jeffries said Democrats will be launching a multipronged “counteroffensive” featuring new redistricting efforts in blue states, new lawsuits against GOP-drawn maps…
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) on Sunday called a recent Virginia Supreme Court ruling rolling back redistricting in the state “disgraceful,” saying the court “suckered the people of Virginia.” “So, what the Virginia Supreme Court did was not only wrong, it was disgraceful. They basically said, ‘Hey, Virginia, spend all this taxpayers’ money holding an election,…
Virginia Rep. Jennifer McClellan (D) on Sunday said “all options” are on the table for Democrats in the Old Dominion State as they respond to a ruling from the state Supreme Court that struck down their redistricting measure. The decision immediately eliminates four House seats that were expected to flip to the Democrats in midterm…
<p>Joan Walsh</p> <div><img alt="" src="https://www.thenation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/abigail-spanberger-redistricting-gt-img.jpg" /></div> <div> <div class="wp-block-the-nation-dek article-title__dek"> <p>Democrats must stop conceding that the only answer for various racist voting laws is that Democrats just have to vote more and harder and better.</p> </div> </div> <p>The post <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/virginia-redistricting-democrats/">On Redistricting, Will Virginia Democrats Surrender, or Get Creative?</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.thenation.com">The Nation</a>.</p>