Virginia court rules in favor of Democrats in redistricting case

[Oddball]

The demographics stay the same, but the distribution changes when allowed to be allocated into more and more piles.

STILL doesn't change the demographics, phuking cheater.

 

[postman]

Texas could have taken ten, but they didn't.

Indiana could have taken them all, but they didn't.

Actually in those states it's a dangerous game.
Redistribution based on 2024, when there's been a dramatic shift in political support in 2025 elections.

 

[Care4all]

Is this the final word..or must we go through yet some more hoops to resolve this issue.
Well...The Virginia Supreme court needs to weigh in--but it does appear that the redistricting will stand.
Like it or not, Gerrymandering is a part of American politics..and the courts will not step in.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5850643-virginia-congressional-map-ruling/

A Virginia court ruled in favor of Democrats in a case concerning the Old Dominion’s congressional lines on Sunday, denying a last-minute Republican effort challenging Democrats’ redistricting referendum and the composition of the new House map passed by voters.

Richmond Circuit Court Judge Tracy Thorne-Begland denied a request by the Republican National Committee (RNC), Virginia GOP and others to block the results of a redistricting referendum held last week, when voters narrowly passed a set of congressional lines that gives Democrats four additional pickup opportunities in November.

The Virginia congressional delegation currently has a 6-5 Democratic edge, but the new map would give the party a 10-1 edge in November.

“This Court knows its role is clear. It is not to assess the wisdom of public policy nor to engage in policy making from the bench,” Thorne-Begland wrote. “Instead, it is to decide if those with whom we have entrusted power have exercised that power in conformance with their constitutional mandate. On this question, the Court’s answer is in the affirmative.”

I actually think they may want the Supreme court to rule on this and shoot them down.....

in hopes that this will stop all the future ideological Gerrymandering by all the Republican states, once and for all....

maybe?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Lets wait for a conservative SC to rule

They did, in DEC 2025.

They said - and I paraphrase - that gerrymandering for political power is A-Okay.

The case involved the Trump/Texas power grab to try to protect the House majority in the upcoming mid-term elections.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Actually in those states it's a dangerous game.
Redistribution based on 2024, when there's been a dramatic shift in political support in 2025 elections.

Yep,

Delute safe GOP districts by moving GOP votes around to try to overcome DEM votes leaves the original districts vulnerable as now there are less GOP votes.

With Trump being so unpopular, and the mid-terms being a referendum on Trump, the results could be unexpected.

WW

 

[Hafar1014]

They did, in DEC 2025.

They said - and I paraphrase - that gerrymandering for political power is A-Okay.

The case involved the Trump/Texas power grab to try to protect the House majority in the upcoming mid-term elections.

WW

They will rule again and the Virginia case will be struck down as race based and it disenfranches republicans

 

[WorldWatcher]

They will rule again and the Virginia case will be struck down as race based and it disenfranches republicans

Nope the SCOTUS said the opposite, political gerrymandering was fine.

The SCOTUS won’t even take the case as it’s a state constitution issue. This will end with the VA Supreme Court.

WW

 

[postman]

STILL doesn't change the demographics, phuking cheater.

Think wootz steel or kitae's forging.

 

[postman]

They will rule again and the Virginia case will be struck down as race based and it disenfranches republicans

The Supreme Court has addressed discrimination based on political party primarily in the context of public employment and gerrymandering, with distinct rulings for each. Generally, the Court prohibits public employers from discriminating based on party affiliation, but it has ruled that federal courts cannot intervene in partisan gerrymandering cases

 

[blackhawk]

Same old same old from the partisans on both sides it’s only wrong when the other side does it never when mine does.

 

[postman]

Nope the SCOTUS said the opposite, political gerrymandering was fine.

The SCOTUS won’t even take the case as it’s a state constitution issue. This will end with the VA Supreme Court.

WW

Technically they didn't say it was fine, but that they weren't allowed to interfere with that kind of politics.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Technically they didn't say it was fine, but that they weren't allowed to interfere with that kind of politics.

Which is why I said "paraphased", they wimped out and said what Texas did was okay.

WW

 

[Billiejeens]

No it's not the final word.

There was a different case on the matter heard in oral aguments yesterday at the VA Supreme Court.

There is another different case currently on appeal to stay Judge Hurley's halting certification.

The people of Virginia spoke, and they are trying to supress the vote.
.
.
.
.
Hell you could say it was a "landslide victory" if you use Trumps definiation. He won 49.8% to 48.3% over Harris and called it a "landslide" and "mandate", the biggest in history. The Ameendment appears to have one 51.68% to 48.32% - a huge landslide using GOP metrics.

WW

President Trump had a landslide victory margin of approximately 34%

 

[westwall]

Karl Rove saved the Republican party via gerrymandering.
The only liar here your partisan azz.

Name one repub state with ZERO democrat congress critters.

GO!

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

Name one repub state with ZERO democrat congress critters.

GO!

Idaho is among the 12 states with zero Dem reps on the national scene.

Too stupid for Google?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It is fun watching the dems expose themselves as the true authoritarians, trampling on the voting rights of their subjects.

Trump and Republicans have only themselves to blame – they started this redistricting nonsense, Democrats had no other choice but to respond in kind.

 

[westwall]

It's hilarious to see the outrage from rightists when Democrats use their tactics.

Except it's the other way round, child. Your democrat masters have already gerrymandered 5 states into having zero representation while having 40 percent GOP voters.

The repubs are merely following the DNCCCP lead.

 

[postman]

Name one repub state with ZERO democrat congress critters.

GO!

O.K.

As of 2026, Alaska's congressional delegation to the 119th United States Congress consists of two senators and one representative, all of whom are Republicans

 

[westwall]

O.K.

As of 2026, Alaska's congressional delegation to the 119th United States Congress consists of two senators and one representative, all of whom are Republicans

What is the percentage of democrats in the state? I'll give you a hint, it's under 15%

 

[jc456]

Is this the final word..or must we go through yet some more hoops to resolve this issue.
Well...The Virginia Supreme court needs to weigh in--but it does appear that the redistricting will stand.
Like it or not, Gerrymandering is a part of American politics..and the courts will not step in.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5850643-virginia-congressional-map-ruling/

A Virginia court ruled in favor of Democrats in a case concerning the Old Dominion’s congressional lines on Sunday, denying a last-minute Republican effort challenging Democrats’ redistricting referendum and the composition of the new House map passed by voters.

Richmond Circuit Court Judge Tracy Thorne-Begland denied a request by the Republican National Committee (RNC), Virginia GOP and others to block the results of a redistricting referendum held last week, when voters narrowly passed a set of congressional lines that gives Democrats four additional pickup opportunities in November.

The Virginia congressional delegation currently has a 6-5 Democratic edge, but the new map would give the party a 10-1 edge in November.

“This Court knows its role is clear. It is not to assess the wisdom of public policy nor to engage in policy making from the bench,” Thorne-Begland wrote. “Instead, it is to decide if those with whom we have entrusted power have exercised that power in conformance with their constitutional mandate. On this question, the Court’s answer is in the affirmative.”

So you believe in kings