Editors at National Review Online highlight political shenanigans in North Carolina’s northern neighbor.
Early voting is already underway a full month before the April 21 referendum in Virginia. A yes vote would approve the grotesque Democratic gerrymander proposed by Governor Abigail Spanberger and the state’s Democratic legislature. Virginia voters should say no — and Republican donors would be wise to get involved before it’s too late. For national Republicans, the potential four-seat swing could decide control of the House. They should act as if that is the case. …
… [T]he redistricting is absurdly partisan: Unlike other deep-red and deep-blue states redrawing their maps, Virginia has long been a closely divided purple state that was Republican-governed as recently as 2025, yet Democrats seek a ten-to-one Democratic House district map in place of the current six-to-five map. It’s also unfair on regional grounds, snaking multiple districts into the Beltway region so that rural and exurban Virginians will be “represented” by members elected by D.C.-area urban and suburban liberals.
It’s also a flip-flop from a 2020 referendum pushed by Democrats, which was then backed by more than 60 percent of the state’s voters with the aim of preventing partisan gerrymanders. Democrats, unhappy now with the consequences of that vote in a high-turnout presidential election, are trying to sneak this through in a low-turnout off-year election in April against underfunded opposition. There are still legal challenges to the gerrymander, but for now, the Virginia Supreme Court has chosen to let the people weigh in first, which will moot the court cases — if the voters reject this scheme.
Democrats have the deck stacked in their favor. The ballot proposal is a textbook example of a loaded question: “Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia’s standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?” (emphasis ours). Who could be against restoring fairness?
