A Virginia circuit court judge moved to block the certification of a voter-approved redistricting referendum the day after voters narrowly passed it, throwing the state’s congressional map into legal uncertainty just months before November’s midterm elections.
Tazewell County Circuit Court Chief Judge Jack C. Hurley Jr. issued the order on Wednesday, declaring the entire constitutional amendment process invalid from the start and issuing a permanent injunction preventing the State Board of Elections and other state officials from certifying the April 21 referendum results or taking any action to implement the proposed congressional map. The ruling effectively keeps Virginia’s existing court-drawn district lines in place while appeals proceed.
Virginia voters had approved the constitutional amendment on Tuesday by a margin of roughly 51.5 percent to 48.5 percent. The amendment, enabled through House Bill 29 signed by Governor Abigail Spanberger in February, would have temporarily transferred congressional redistricting authority from a bipartisan commission to the Democratic-majority General Assembly. Under the plan, lawmakers could redraw district lines through October 2030, after which authority would return to the commission. The proposed maps would have shifted Virginia’s congressional delegation from its current 6-to-5 Democratic advantage to a 10-to-1 Democratic tilt, a change that Democrats argued was a direct response to Republican-led redistricting efforts in states like Texas and Florida carried out at President Trump’s urging.
Judge Hurley concluded that the General Assembly failed to follow procedural requirements in the Virginia Constitution before placing the measure on the ballot. His written order found that required publication and timing steps were not properly followed and that the ballot language itself was misleading and failed constitutional standards for clarity.
The lawsuit that produced the ruling was brought by the Republican National Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee, among other GOP plaintiffs, who argued that Democrats had advanced the amendment through unconstitutional procedures and deceived voters through the ballot’s framing.
Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones, a Democrat, moved immediately to challenge the decision, announcing that his office would file an appeal with the Court of Appeals. Jones argued that a circuit court judge should not have the power to nullify a direct vote of the people. The case is expected to reach the Supreme Court of Virginia quickly, given the compressed timeline before the November elections. This was not the first time Judge Hurley ruled against the amendment: he had issued prior orders against the process in January and February, both of which were overturned by higher courts before the referendum proceeded.
President Trump took to Truth Social after the referendum results came in, calling the election rigged and claiming that a large late surge of mail-in ballots had delivered Democrats a crooked victory. He also criticized the ballot language as intentionally confusing. No evidence was offered for the fraud claim, and state and federal authorities have consistently found no proof of widespread irregularities in mail-in voting.
The stakes extend well beyond Virginia. Control of the U.S. House after November may hinge on a handful of competitive seats, and a swing of four Virginia districts from Republican to Democratic would meaningfully alter the math. That outcome directly concerns South Carolina’s congressional delegation. Rep. William Timmons, who represents SC-4 covering Greenville and Spartanburg, holds seats on the House Financial Services and Oversight committees as part of the current Republican majority. A House that flips to Democratic control would reshape the committee landscape Timmons and other South Carolina Republicans currently operate within. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has long opposed Democratic-initiated mid-decade redistricting, viewing the broader national push as a partisan maneuver that bypasses voter-approved independent commissions.
The Supreme Court of Virginia is now expected to have the final word on whether the voter-approved amendment can take effect in time for the 2026 elections. Candidate filing deadlines and primary dates were already shifted in anticipation of the new maps, adding additional pressure on the courts to resolve the matter before the election calendar moves forward.
