Have you noticed how many times things Dems say they are doing to ‘save Democracy’ keep getting struck down as Unconstitutional?

You can add that cynical 10-1 Virgina electoral map to your list of examples.

As regular readers will recall, the GOP immediately filed suit after the referendum results came in. They would have done so sooner, but the rules in court required the referendum result to come in first, otherwise the case would be ‘moot’. There were at least four different lines of reasoning for why the referendum was illegitimate, ranging from the charged wording of the question to the constitutional requirements that were not met concerning the timing of the referendum itself. (Today’s court ruling makes that point explicitly stating, “Throughout this litigation, the Commonwealth has insisted that we cannot lawfully decide this case prior to the referendum.”)

Everyone from Spanberger, to ‘Temu Obama’ Jeffries and Schumer, to Eric Holder and Obama himself crowed over the results of the referendum into which they had sunk so much financial and political capital in an end-run they believed would guarantee the Dems a big win in the Midterms.

They popped those corks a little too early.

In a 4-3 ruling, Virginia’s Supreme Court has just struck down the redistricting as unconstitutional. (Rulinghere)

The ruling made clear this was not a question of whether this was a small margin of victory or a large margin of victory, as the margin of victory in he referendum did not even enter into their considerations of the validity of the process itself.

Why was Virginia’s process different than say, California, Tennessee, Texas or Florida? The court reminds us that, unlike those other states, the Commonwealth of Virginia splits the amendment process between the people and their representatives.

Under this provision, the General Assembly can propose amendments but cannot adopt them. The inverse is also true. Virginia voters can adopt or reject amendments but cannot propose them. This constitutional-amendment process of dividing power between the people and their politicians has withstood the test of time “for more than one hundred years.” Coleman, 219 Va.at 153. And it has remained so for the half-century since Coleman.

It is more than a little ironic that a big part of what invalidated this process is the fact that Democrats themselves have fought long and hard to have an extended window of elections spread over a series of weeks, rather than a single, specified election day. Over a million Virginians had already cast their ballots before the referendum was crafted, but because Election Day itself had not yet come, they claimed to have met the requirements of presenting it before the election. (The court did NOT agree with them.)

Source: Clash Daily