A Virginia circuit court judge has struck down a redistricting amendment approved by the General Assembly, ruling that lawmakers went beyond their authority during a 2024 special legislative session and failed to meet constitutional requirements tied to elections and voter notice. In a sweeping decision issued Tuesday, Tazewell County Circuit Court Judge Jack S. Hurley Jr. invalidated the actions used to advance the proposed amendment, blocking it from moving forward and preventing it from being sent to voters. Turns out, even politicians have to follow the rules they write.
The lawsuit centered on whether lawmakers were allowed to consider a redistricting-related constitutional amendment during a special session originally called to address budget issues, and whether they properly expanded the scope of that session. Hurley made it clear that procedure matters, writing that both houses of the General Assembly are required to follow their own rules and resolutions.
Hurley found that lawmakers improperly added redistricting to the list of permitted topics during the special session without securing the required unanimous consent or supermajority vote. Because of that, the joint resolution proposing changes to how congressional and legislative districts are drawn fell outside the limits lawmakers themselves had set when the session was called.
“The Court FINDS that adding… [a] joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Virginia related to the reapportionment or redistricting violated… the General Assembly’s own call to the Governor for the 2024 Special Session, and the Court ORDERS that any such action is void, ab initio,” Hurley wrote. Legal Latin aside, that means the move never should have happened in the first place.
The ruling also addressed when an election legally takes place under Virginia law, rejecting the argument that an election only happens on Election Day instead of during early voting. Hurley noted that more than 1 million Virginians had already voted in the 2025 House of Delegates elections before lawmakers acted on the amendment.
“For this Court to find the election was only on November 4, 2025, those one million Virginia voters would be completely disenfranchised,” Hurley wrote. Apparently, early voters count too—shocking concept for some.
The court further found that lawmakers failed to comply with a state law requiring proposed constitutional amendments to be publicly posted and published ahead of the next election. Since those steps were skipped, the judge ruled that votes taken during the 2026 regular session could not count as the constitutionally required second approval.
“Therefore, the Court FINDS that the provisions of… the Code of Virginia have not been complied with, and therefore all votes on the proposed Constitutional Amendment… are ineffective as being a ‘SECOND’ VOTE OF THE General Assembly,” Hurley wrote.
In the end, the decision reinforces a simple principle: process matters, the law matters, and shortcuts don’t count. The ruling puts voters first and keeps the Constitution from being treated like a suggestion. Accountability may be rare in politics, but when it shows up, it’s a good sign for the future.
