Making the Argument with Nick Freitas

Democrats Decide the Virginia Supreme Court is a "Threat to Democracy"

May 12, 2026

A breakdown of a Virginia Supreme Court ruling on redistricting and alleged constitutional violations. A look at contested ballot language and claims the amendment process was abused. Discussion of plans to change judicial retirement rules and whether lawmakers can legally reshape the court. Exploration of originalism versus activism and national consequences if similar tactics spread.

Ask episode

AI Snips

Chapters

Transcript

Episode notes

INSIGHT

Court Overturned Virginia Referendum On Process

The Virginia Supreme Court struck down the gerrymander referendum on procedural grounds, not on map fairness alone.
Justice Kelsey found the amendment process violated the intervening-election timing, 90-day clerk notice, and partisan ballot language.

INSIGHT

Special Session And Ballot Language Skewed The Process

Democrats held a special session during an ongoing intervening election and used partisan ballot language to push the amendment.
They allowed 45 days of early voting, spent ~$64 million, and scheduled an April special election with targeted turnout advantages.

ANECDOTE

Democrats Once Supported The Commission Then Reversed

Nick recalls that the original bipartisan bill creating the redistricting commission had broad Democratic support before the party reversed course when they gained a majority.
He witnessed Democrats previously arguing for the commission and later opposing it once in power.

Get the Snipd Podcast app to discover more snips from this episode