Virginia is among 46 participating states in the settlement with Block, Inc., the company behind Cash App. The commonwealth will receive about $845,500, Attorney General Jay Jones announced Monday, which his office can use for consumer protection efforts or other purposes permitted under state law.

The investigation, led by Oregon and Texas, concluded that Block rapidly expanded Cash App’s user base even as fraud became a growing problem, leaving many customers unable to get meaningful help after their accounts were compromised or money disappeared.

“Virginians deserve to trust that the companies they do business with are acting legally and with integrity, and when a company acts outside the law or unethically, this office will hold them accountable,” Jones said in a statement.

“When companies strategically omit information and foster fraudulent practices, it hurts consumers and shakes confidence in our institutions. I want to assure Virginians throughout the commonwealth that the OAG is using all available tools to protect them.”

Investigators said Block repeatedly assured users their money was safe on Cash App in ways that suggested protections similar to those offered by traditional banks. At the same time, they alleged, the company knew fraud on the platform was increasing but  safeguards and adequately warn users about the risk.

Much of the investigation focused on how Cash App handled fraud before and after it occurred.

Investigators said the company favored a quick, low-friction sign-up process with limited identity verification, making it easier for scammers to open accounts.

For years, Cash App also lacked telephone customer support. Users locked out of their accounts or looking for help often searched online for a support number, only to reach fake customer service lines run by scammers.

The latter often persuaded victims to hand over login credentials or gained access to their financial accounts. Investigators said Block knew about the problem but waited years before establishing an official customer support phone line.

Another issue involved “Cash App Fridays,” a long-running social media promotion that encouraged customers to post their unique Cash App usernames, known as $cashtags, for a chance to win prizes. Investigators said scammers exploited the campaign by contacting participants, falsely claiming they had won and persuading them to share account information.

The probe also found that customers reporting suspicious activity were sometimes locked out of their accounts for weeks without access to their money. According to the investigation, the company often delayed fraud investigations or failed to provide refunds required under consumer protection laws.

Under the settlement, Block agreed to make a series of changes aimed at reducing fraud and improving customer service.

The company must maintain customer support capable of resolving fraud complaints, account lockouts and similar problems. It also agreed to provide live assistance around the clock, including access to a human representative by phone for at least 13.5 hours each day and through live chat for at least 18 hours daily.

Block further agreed to stop making false or misleading statements about Cash App’s security, discontinue marketing practices that investigators said increased fraud risk, educate customers about common scams and comply with legal requirements governing fraud investigations and reimbursement for unauthorized transactions.

“We share the attorneys general’s commitment to addressing industry challenges and continue to invest in operations and technology to promote a safe and healthy financial ecosystem,” a Block spokesperson .

Still, the company denied wrongdoing, saying the settlement resolves claims involving historical practices. It also said it has already made significant investments in customer support, fraud detection and compliance.

The settlement comes months after  by the federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which accused Block of failing to properly investigate fraud reports and provide adequate customer service.

Under that agreement, Block agreed to distribute between $75 million and $120 million to consumers nationwide, pay civil penalties and adopt additional reforms.

Additional information about the settlement is available .

Source

The change rescinds a 2021 Biden administration policy that to notify Congress and investigate when detainees had died within 30 days of being released from custody.

Attorney General Jay Jones announced Monday that Virginia had joined the coalition calling on the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Customs Enforcement to restore the previous reporting standards. The attorneys general argue the policy change weakens public oversight as concerns about conditions inside immigration detention facilities grow.

The coalition to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin and Acting ICE Director David Venturella criticizing the policy shift and warning it could allow detention facilities to avoid scrutiny when critically ill detainees die soon after their release.

“This new policy is a blatant attempt to hide dangerous conditions inside ICE detention centers from the public,” James announcing the effort.

“ICE must ensure that every person in its custody receives basic medical care, safe conditions, and humane treatment. Instead, this administration is trying to evade accountability and operate in darkness as deaths in ICE custody reach historic levels.”

Virginia is home to multiple ICE detention centers, including the in Bowling Green and the , as immigration enforcement activity has surged nationwide.

Recent and estimate ICE is currently detaining tens of thousands of people across the country — among the highest totals in the agency’s history — amid mounting concerns over medical care and detention conditions.

Jones said Monday that the rollback undermines oversight systems intended to protect detainees and hold detention facilities accountable.

“With the disturbing rise in reports of abuse and death in ICE detention facilities in recent months, transparency is more important now than ever. This change in policy is an abhorrent attempt by ICE and the DHS to sidestep responsibility for their dangerous actions, and we won’t allow it,” Jones said in a statement.

Under the prior policy, ICE officials could request reviews and publicly release findings when former detainees died shortly after release, particularly in cases involving allegations of inadequate medical treatment or neglect.

The attorneys general argue that the recent change creates an incentive for detention facilities to release seriously ill detainees shortly before death, potentially avoiding the scrutiny that follows deaths occurring inside custody.

In Monday’s letter, the coalition said the revised policy “reduces the federal government’s accountability for conditions in ICE facilities” and weakens oversight intended to ensure adequate medical care inside detention centers.

But DHS officials have defended the change, arguing ICE is no longer responsible for individuals once they are released from custody and described the rollback as an administrative matter and a change.

“Under this updated policy, when an individual is no longer in ICE custody then ICE will no longer be responsible for monitoring or reviewing deaths that may occur,” the statement said.

ICE does not appear to have maintained a public nationwide tally of deaths occurring after detainees are released from custody, a gap advocates say under the agency’s new reporting policy.

Human Rights Watch that occurred while individuals were in ICE custody between Jan. 20, 2025 and June 25, 2026, while the health policy organization KFF in or connected to ICE detention as of March 18, 2026.

ICE continues on in-custody detainee deaths.

The coalition’s letter references the case of Ismael Ayala-Uribe, a former recipient after being transferred from the Adelanto ICE Processing Center in California to a hospital suffering from septic shock linked to an untreated abscess and other complications.

According to , Ayala-Uribe repeatedly complained about worsening symptoms while detained. Relatives and immigration advocates accused the facility of failing to provide timely medical care before his condition became critical.

Federal require immigration facilities to conduct health screenings, provide medical and mental healthcare, maintain sanitary conditions and protect detainees from unnecessary force.

Democratic attorneys general and immigration advocates have argued that oversight has weakened amid the Trump administration’s broader immigration crackdown and expansion of detention operations.

Joining New York and Virginia in signing Monday’s letter were the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia.

The Department of Homeland Security and ICE did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the coalition’s demand.

Source

The data will be essential to determine whether updated conservation standards and catch limits for the small forage fish should be established. Menhaden sustains several species and fuels the only industrial reduction fishing operation in the Bay.

With $2 million allotted over the biennium, researchers at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission will conduct a study on the menhaden population within the Bay to help regulators manage a “scientifically defensible and ecologically meaningful” cap of how much fisheries can catch, according to the budget language.

Conservation groups have been raising alarm over the potential decrease of menhaden in the Bay for years.

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation said striped bass and have suffered because they don’t have enough menhaden to eat. Multiple bills to add the funding in the state budget have failed to pass, .

“Unfortunately, many questions remain about the health of the Bay’s menhaden population and the iconic species such as osprey that depend upon it,” said Will Poston, CBF’s forage campaign manager. “This is precisely why independent science on menhaden in the Bay is so important.”

Ocean Harvesters, which contracts with Omega Protein, is the only reduction fishery allowed to fish within the Bay in Virginia waters. The company has vehemently denied that their operations are depleting the menhaden within the Bay.

The Reedville-based corporation has already adhered to a Bay-specific yearly catch cap of 51,000 metric tons. Maryland has banned reduction fishing – which is when the fish are caught to be ground up into oil. This limits where Ocean Harvesters can catch menhaden in the Bay.

The company has pushed back against further regulations of their Bay catch limits and argued the catch limits and time period quotas offered up by various groups are arbitrary and not based on science.

“We look forward to continuing to work with the Virginia Institute of Marine Science in collaboration with the Virginia Marine Resources Commission to develop a scientific study of the Bay’s Atlantic menhaden population,” Monty Deihl, Ocean Harvesters CEO said in a statement.

The budget language lays out what the study should consider: seasonal abundance, movement rates, impacts of menhaden predator consumption, spatial and temporal patterns of commercial fishing in the Bay and the possibility of localized depletion of menhaden populations.

The measure allows for this research to utilize the industry-backed ’s recommendations on the Bay’s menhaden population.

Researchers may also pull from thethat laid out a roadmap for this study.

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Menhaden Management Board voted to by 20% last October, citing concerns about striped bass populations, on which many species and fishermen rely.

More recently, the management board for Ocean Harvesters’ work within the Bay.

Some of the options included reducing the Bay cap and implementing time period quotas to help menhaden populations work their way up the Bay towards Maryland, where pound net fishermen have cited lacking yields for years.

However, the board put off their decision on these changes until later this year.

Even with the Senate agreeing to all of the governor’s amendments, there was still heated debate on the floor ahead of the vote, reflecting the persistent challenges the subject has presented through multiple legislative sessions.

Sen. Richard Stuart, R-King George, whose district includes the Reedville fishery, said that he believes there is no evidence that the fishery is overfishing menhaden – and that past legislation looking to shut down the fishery or reduce its work is unfair.

“It concerns me from the perspective of 260 families that rely on this. They are very good jobs … in the area. There are another 200 or 300 indirect jobs,” Stuart said.

Sen. Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, said his constituents in parts of the Potomac River have been increasingly concerned about osprey populations. The debate over menhaden has lingered the entire time he has served in the General Assembly.

“We have these fish experts at VIMS, (who) are hopefully going to get some information about it. I just know that there’s been some concern for the last 17 years,” Surovell said. “We haven’t done anything.”

Progress on the study will be presented to multiple legislative, administrative and regulatory agencies by Oct. 1 for the next two years.

The Virginia Department of Workforce Development, along with other groups, will report on possible impacts on workers if there are reductions in catch allowances for the entire coast and within the Bay.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: info@virginiamercury.com.

Source

That growth has brought major economic benefits for local governments, but it has also divided communities increasingly weary of the facilities’ heavy demands on water and energy, among other impacts.

The commonwealth’s rise as a global digital leader did not happen overnight, said House Technology Committee Chair Cliff Hayes, D-Chesapeake. It was a result of years of persistence, long-term planning and problem-solving.

”This designation for the commonwealth to be the digital capital not only of this country but of the world has taken a lot of stamina, resilience and vision,” Hayes said.

Hayes said leadership also means adapting to new challenges. This year alone, lawmakers passed an entire package of bills aimed at further regulating the industry, while the fight over tax incentives remains largely unsolved.

AOL’s move 

Ashburn’s rise as one of the largest digital infrastructure hubs began in 1997 with the arrival of America Online, or AOL, then the primary internet gateway for many users. Soon after, UUNet/WorldCom and the relocation of the Metropolitan Area Ethernet East, a major internet exchange and traffic hub, helped create unmatched fiber connectivity, turning Loudoun County into a key internet crossroads and destination for other businesses.

Buddy Rizer, executive director for Loudoun County Economic Development, said AOL’s decision to locate in Loudoun helped make the internet mainstream for Americans and anchored the infrastructure that turned Loudoun and Virginia into the world’s leading internet hub.

“You can’t overstate the importance of AOL, right? AOL didn’t invent the internet, but they made it accessible to ordinary Americans at the moment that the commercial internet was starting to take off… by the late 1990s AOL had 20 million subscribers, and roughly half of U.S. homes that had internet were using AOL by 1997.”

Rizer said once Loudoun established core infrastructure and attracted a few anchor companies, growth became compounding: infrastructure drew companies, companies brought more infrastructure and the cycle continued for roughly 20 years.

Data storage and computing explodes 

While data centers have existed in Virginia for decades, the recent rise of artificial intelligence has accelerated demand for the warehouse-like facilities that store and process data around the world.

Ali Mehrizi-Sani, a professor at Virginia Tech, said Northern Virginia had many of the right ingredients to attract the industry even before the state sales and use tax exemption passed in 2008.

“The fact is that we have a lot of customers of data, and that’s really the federal government and their contractors,” Mehrizi-Sani said. “They use a lot of data, so really just proximity to Washington, D.C. has been a main driver of honestly everything in Virginia, including data centers.”

The early development of the internet exchange points in Virginia, combined with large stretches of undeveloped land in Northern Virginia, also helped fuel the industry’s growth. Loudoun County, for example, was far more rural than it is today.

Loudoun recorded 71 operating data centers, the most of any locality in the commonwealth, according to a 2024 by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission. Statewide, 131 data centers were operating at the time.

“That’s why you see data centers are coming further south, even to areas like where I live in Roanoke and Botetourt County, essentially in search of land,” Mehrizi-Sani said.

He said data centers have also remained in Virginia because electricity rates are comparatively lower than in other parts of the country. Another major factor is the state’s exemption.

Tax breaks and tax gains

In Loudoun, data center revenue has generated substantial tax income year after year, providing the county with more than $100 million annually to support schools and government services.

The revenue stream — estimated at in 2018 — has grown enough that the county has reduced real estate tax rates for homeowners every year for the past decade, according to county officials.

Revenue from data centers has also allowed county leaders to propose reducing the personal property tax rate on vehicles beginning in tax year 2026 and eliminating the $25 vehicle license fee.

In 2008, the General Assembly approved a statewide incentive allowing data centers to avoid the state’s 5.3% sales and use tax, which at the time was estimated to save the industry about $1.5 million annually. Data centers routinely refresh computer equipment and software, the exemption can significantly reduce costs every few years.

Now, however, the cost of the tax break has ballooned to about $1.9 billion annually in foregone state revenue.

While the tax break had previously been extended, and former Gov. Glenn Youngkin sought to continue it through 2050 in his final budget proposal, debate over potentially ending the incentive led to months of negotiations and brought Virginia to the brink of a government shutdown after lawmakers failed to pass a budget until the final days of June.

Some lawmakers argued the industry had benefitted enough from the tax exemption. At the same time, concerns over rising energy costs and environmental impacts prompted legislators to look for ways to reclaim some revenue from the trillion dollar industry.

But Gov. Abigail Spanberger led the push to preserve the tax break, arguing Virginia had “made an agreement” and should not reverse course. The exemption is currently set to expire in 2035 unless lawmakers change it before then.

“We know technology is not bad,” Senate Finance Committee Chair Louise Lucas, D-Portsmouth, . “We all can benefit from technology, but we, as a government, have not done a good job in managing the regulations and the impact on our communities, and that’s what we’ve got to rein in. But we’ve also got to rein in the fact that data centers – they’re some of the largest corporations on the face of the Earth, trillion dollar organizations – are getting tax exemptions right now.”

While the exemption ultimately remained in the budget, lawmakers approved a on data centers expected to bring in a total of $600 million annually, or $1.2 billion over the biennium. The industry will pay 1.1 cents per kilowatt-hour of electricity consumed up to the cap, with any excess refunded at the end of the fiscal year.

Dominion Energy and Mecklenburg, Northern Virginia, and Rappahannock electric cooperatives reported in 2023 that data centers used about 5,050 megawatts of power that year, based on peak-load forecasts, according to the .

“What I have found is that some of the businesses coming to our commonwealth, they want to make investments in our communities and in our workforce. The consumption tax, as we’ve conceived of it here in the commonwealth, is one that’s based on fairness,” Spanberger told The Mercury last month.

Lawmakers also approved for data centers in areas designated as water scarce and within the water management area east of Interstate 95.

The changes aim to push facilities away from evaporative cooling systems that consume millions of gallons of water annually and toward more efficient technologies. Also, for the first time, the state will regulate data center noise levels.

The General Assembly also requiring cleaner backup generators that emit fewer carbon emissions and measures intended to help localities better assess the residential and environmental impacts of proposed facilities.

Public policy 

In 2010, Virginia created a retail and sales tax exemption for data centers, a factor companies have consistently identified as important in site selection.

Loudoun designated large areas for industrial and employment uses where data centers could be built, helping reduce development timelines and support continued growth.

Through successive comprehensive plans, Loudoun also reserved large tracts of land in eastern Loudoun — near Washington Dulles International Airport and the W&OD Trail — for industrial and employment uses close to existing fiber networks and electrical infrastructure. The move ensured a long-term supply of development-ready sites for large-scale data center campuses.

in recent years, with hundreds of community members attending local government meetings to oppose projects near homes, drinking water supplies and high-voltage transmission lines. Residents have urged lawmakers to impose stronger regulations and seek greater financial contributions from the industry for supporting infrastructure.

What’s next 

Last week, lawmakers ordered a work group to study how the data center tax exemption could be phased out or modified to generate additional state revenue. A report is due in November.

While Spanberger has described the new consumption tax as “fair,” the data center industry disagrees. After the budget amendments last week, Data Center Coalition CEO Josh Levi said the new tax will “drive away investment and job creation, and tarnish Virginia’s reputation.”

“The message to businesses in all industries is clear — Virginia is no longer a reliable partner,” Levi said in a June statement.

Rizer argued that Loudoun’s and Virginia’s future depends on treating data centers as a foundation for broader technology growth while maintaining a stable and predictable business climate.

“You can’t take success for granted … the principle that made us successful is a predictable, welcoming environment with predictable tax and policy issues,” Rizer said. “The only way that that success can go into the future is by staying grounded in those principles that brought us this far.”

As for federal involvement in an issue that has become a national flashpoint, Democratic U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, who was governor when the tax exemption passed, said states should decide individually how to manage data center growth rather than adopt a one-size-fits-all approach.

“(Data centers are a) global phenomenon, and being a leader in this important area is good for America’s national security and for Virginia’s economy,” Kaine said. “But there are real challenges when it comes to water, power and land use, so local communities must get a say when it comes to how to handle them.”

Virginia has become the state that many others are watching as they weigh to and regulate the growing data center industry. Lawmakers now face balancing the promise of economic investment with mounting concerns from residents pushing back against continued expansion.

Source

The department briefed board members on the proposed delay at their work session on Wednesday at J. Sergeant Reynolds Community College in Henrico County, following a state study’s finding that the new K-12 accountability system, which includes the cut scores, could be refined.

Virginia will raise cut scores for its Standards of Learning assessments to boost student proficiency, a process that was slated to begin this school year. This initiative, led by former Gov. Glenn Youngkin, followed findings of declining reading and math scores among students in grades 3 through 8, a trend that began during the pandemic.

But critics are urging a slower rollout, saying a quicker shift could increase teacher burnout, lower graduation rates, and worsen inequitable access to education. Several members of the board said at Wednesday’s meeting that they wanted to keep to the original timeline.

Board member Amber Northern, an appointee of former Gov. Glenn Youngkin, said Virginia has received national praise for moving toward higher standards and accountability. She is concerned the proposal jeopardizes the board’s earlier work.

“Regardless of whether it’s a Republican or a Democrat in office … Virginia’s is for high standards and they’re going to work together with colleagues that are on the right, the left, the center .. to continue to do the right thing by kids on an aggressive, yet doable timeline,” said Northern.

Ida McPherson and Bill Hansen, both Youngkin appointees to the board, opposed delaying implementation of the accountability system that includes the cut scores, citing concerns that staving off implementation would negatively impact student outcomes.

Superintendent of Public Instruction Jenna Conway emphasized that higher proficiency cut scores would be in effect one year faster than the original plan.

She also added that staff would meet the request of some members for a side-by-side comparison of the proposal to the board’s original plan, which some — including Fairfax County Public Schools, representing the largest groups of students in the commonwealth — took issue with.

“These changes will have a significant and potentially detrimental impact on schools and students,” Fairfax said in a statement last fall about the original plan. “FCPS supports rigorous standards, but will continue to advocate for this work to be done in meaningful and measured ways.

Arlington Parents for Education, a group advocating for high academic expectations, said in a statement it opposes this proposed delay.

“This last-minute proposal to lower expectations would mislead parents and allow schools to keep delaying the improvements Virginia’s kids desperately need,” the group said in a statement. “Major changes to academic standards should be made through a transparent process focused on student outcomes – not rushed through at the eleventh hour.”

According to a conducted by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, if the plan passes, schools’ overall scores will drop by about 8.5 points, while proficiency scores will fall by about 21 points in reading and 17 points in math.

The study stemmed from lawmakers directing the commission to examine the state’s K-12 accountability system, which was split into two parts: accreditation, which determines whether schools meet legal and regulatory requirements; and the School Performance and Support Framework (SPSF), which provides clear data on student and school performance.

The board praised the report that included recommendations to refine the accountability system. Overall, the recommendations urge the board and lawmakers to continue developing a more transparent and fair system that better reflects student growth and ensures stronger support for struggling schools.

The department is asking the board to consider the proposal to adjust the timeline for rolling out new cut scores to avoid “” and to ensure divisions can fully prepare without having to manage multiple major changes each year.

If approved, the plan starts this upcoming school year. The Department of Education will provide divisions with a preview of results under the higher standards. Schools’ academic progress labels will also change, from “off track” to “approaching expectations,” and from “on track” to “meets expectations.”

Under the proposal, if a student recently moved to the U.S. and is still learning English, they are exempt from the reading assessment in their first year (2026-2027).

High school ratings will use current achievement data instead of longer-term cohort results. Elementary and middle schools won’t be penalized for having too few English Learner students to get a fair evaluation.

For the 2027-2028 school year, the department plans to preview updated School Performance and Support Framework results for divisions without consequences.

Implementation will start in 2028-2029 with a single increase in cut scores and the adoption of the new SPSF version.

Test data from the 2028-2029 school year will be released in the summer of 2029, and accountability data will be published in the fall of 2029, reflecting the new cut scores.

One area that wasn’t mentioned in the proposal was whether the board’s interest in having Virginia’s cut scores meet the “proficient” standard set by the National Assessment of Educational Progress would change.

This standard is defined as a student demonstrating a deeper understanding of complex topics and the ability to apply them in real-world situations.

Gov. Abigail Spanberger appointed four new members to the nine-member board, which remains controlled by Youngkin’s appointees, most of whom supported a gradual four-year increase last November that would have been completed during the 2029-2030 school year.

The proposal would wrap up during the 2028-2029 school year.

Hansen, the board’s vice president, will finish his term June 30 and his replacement will be appointed by Spanberger’s administration.

The board is not expected to take any action on the proposal on Thursday, their next scheduled meeting.

Source

Virginia House of Delegates leaders presented their updated budget proposal Friday, revamping their $74 billion funding plan based on a new revenue forecast ordered by Gov. Abigail Spanberger last month. The House budget no longer includes environmental standards that data centers would have to meet to keep the exemption, which saves the industry nearly $2 billion annually.

Hours after the new House budget was unveiled, Sen. Louise Lucas, D-Portsmouth, divulged an updated Senate budget proposal, with scant details, on social media.

While Lucas didn’t outline the particulars of the plan, she said it included a 4% raise for teachers, $345 million for health and human services initiatives including food assistance for low-income Virginians and a $100 “fair share” rebate for individuals.

Here’s how each chamber plans to address key issues in the next two-year state budget.

Chambers still at odds over data centers

The data center sales and use tax exemption remains the biggest bottle neck on state budget negotiations.. The state currently forgoes an average of $1.6 billion annually by allowing the industry to not pay the 5.3% state tax on their computer equipment and server racks.

Lucas and some other lawmakers are pushing to end the exemption that began as an incentive to draw the industry to the commonwealth in 2008 and cost the state about $1.5 million at the time.

Lawmakers in the House of Delegates, including Speaker Don Scott, consider the exemption a strong driver for union electrical and construction jobs, whose workers build the facilities that make major investments on the local level. The House’s previous budget would keep the exemption in place and require data centers to use cleaner back up generators, improve their energy efficiency, and take other environmental steps to keep the tax break.

The House’s updated budget preserves the exemption through 2035 and eliminates the environmental standards. Instead, the House proposed creating a commission made up of legislators and stakeholders to examine data centers’ energy use and how the industry impacts the state and local tax revenues.

A similar report was released by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission in 2024. But Spanberger, who supports the House’s plan, said the new commission would dig deeper and produce more in-depth reports that would help drive policy decisions in the next regular session of the General Assembly.

Concerning the proposed commission’s focus, Spanberger said Friday, “We want a little bit more help in understanding if we’re making good choices for our communities. (Such as) rules of the road, best practices, whether it’s setbacks or noise reductions, limits on diesel generators, requirements for battery backup.”

The Senate has not released the full context of their new updated budget proposal but it includes a “tiered state impact fee,” Lucas said in her social media statement. The fee would be placed on the facilities according to their generator type and their energy capacity. Lucas said the system would generate an estimated $1.7 billion in tax revenue for the state but didn’t detail how. Her office did not have further details of the proposal available for clarification on Monday.

Lucas also said the new Senate budget includes funding for a work group to study the tax exemption and other potential protections for ratepayers and local communities, similar to the house’s proposed commission.

Cannabis market still hazy

After Spanberger vetoed bipartisan legislation to create a retail market for recreational cannabis, House lawmakers said Friday that the proposal has been added to their updated budget.

Few details were available Friday about the weed market plan, spearheaded by Del. Paul Krizek, D-Fairfax, but he confirmed “we have a deal, and it’s just a matter of finishing the legal edits” of the retail market framework. Krizek said more details would be released in a joint press conference with Spanberger on Tuesday.

House lawmakers also added “$865,000 each year from the general fund and four positions to support workload increases” in the The Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ Office of Weights and Measures to their updated spending plan, “related to the establishment of an adult-use recreational cannabis market.”

The overview of the new Senate budget shared by Lucas didn’t include the cannabis framework. However, the chamber passed SB 542, the companion measure to the House bill which would create the marketplace. And the Senate ’s two-year budget pitched before the end of this year’s legislative session includes over $12 million for the operation of the Virginia Cannabis Control Authority over two years.

Navigating healthcare hurdles

Because Virginia and other states are required to reduce their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program error rate to 6% by next year, House lawmakers earmarked $130 million to fund new cost share benefit allotments.

Sometimes errors in overpaying or underpaying households arise from paperwork mistakes by government staff or outdated information from beneficiaries. A federal law passed last summer mandates states drop their error rates.

That same law also entails verification changes to Medicaid, which is estimated to put thousands of Virginians at risk of losing coverage and add financial strains to hospitals.

These shifts are why the state budget proposals from both chambers include money to help streamline compliance for social service workers around the state and mitigate insurance drop offs.

The new proposal from the House maintains a $2.4 billion increase to fully fund Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program forecasts. It would also add $39 million to partially restore proposed cuts to Medicaid and CHIP.

House lawmakers earmarked $3 million to support social service staff compliance with the new SNAP and Medicaid federal standards.

Where a previous version of the House budget entailed a $5 million increase in funding for the state’s free clinics, the new draft increased it to $13 million. An already “strained safety net,” free clinics are bracing for an influx in uninsured patients as people lose Medicaid or ACA and are a key partner for hospitals to reduce caseloads in emergency rooms.

A holdover from the chamber’s previous proposal, lawmakers would direct $79.1 million towards a state-level version of the expired Affordable Care Act subsidies that Congress let expire last year.

“We’ve never had this much of an onus on the state before,” Henrico Democratic Del. Rodney Willett, who chairs the House’s Health and Human Services Committee, said in a previous interview. “It will take a lot of work with the people, processes and systems to go with that.”

Over 33,000 Virginians and counting have dropped their ACA insurance so far this year amid rising premiums. Of Virginia’s roughly 400,000 ACA clients, about 100,000 have been estimated to have lost the subsidies.

Likewise, the Senate has its ideas for addressing the federal fallout too.

Its newest version still includes $200 million for a state-level ACA subsidy along with a special enrollment period for people who dropped off and want to sign back up for insurance.

Health and human services work in the state would receive $345 million and would address a range of programs, from Medicaid to SNAP to developmental disability waiver rates.

It’s unclear how that will be divided up as the Senate had not fully released its next proposed version of the budget by the time of this publication. Initially, the chamber had settled on $135 million for SNAP, with lawmakers assuming the state cannot drop below a 10% error rate.

More recently, the chamber suggested $190 million to offset future rate increases in state employee health insurance premiums.

Housing support boosted

As a flurry of housing bills passed the legislature and were signed into law by the governor, both budget proposals entail funding to help get them off the ground — but they differ in how that should happen.

The House’s new draft would invest an additional $20 million into the Virginia Housing Trust Fund. The program offers loans for low-income housing projects and provides grants to organizations that serve unhoused people. The additional boost brings the House’s earmark for the fund up to $195 million over the next two years.

The House also wants to add $14 million over the next two years to support organizations that work with unhoused populations or help people at risk of homelessness.

As state lawmakers have refined Virginia’s Eviction Reduction Program, the House proposes $11.5 million in new resources for it, bringing total support to $18.5 million over the biennium.

On housing, the preview of the Senate’s forthcoming new budget draft entails $110 million for housing-related initiatives “including eviction reduction, weatherization programs, and Housing Trust Fund deposits.”

K-12, school construction funding reflects uncertainty

Local governments and school leaders are waiting on the budget to be finalized to decide how they will be able to cover teacher pay raises, and how much those raises will be. The legislature’s dueling spending plans also address another key concern: covering construction and modernization costs for the upcoming school year.

The House’s revised budget proposes a 3% raise for state and state-supported employees, including teachers, over the next two years, while the new Senate budget includes a 4% increase aimed at moving Virginia toward the national average teacher salary.

“With inflation being over 4%, a 3% raise does not really end up being a raise, it’s a pay cut in practice, and the average teacher would lose money in buying power,” Carol Bauer, president of the Virginia Education Association, said.

In the area of school construction, the House’s revised proposal includes an additional $299 million for school construction grants, bringing the biennial total to $519 million.

In contrast, Lucas’ overview of the updated Senate budget did not mention school construction grants. In February, the body approved a plan to allocate $172 million from the Literary Fund to the School Construction Fund for construction and renovation grants.

However, the Senate’s plans for the grants and the School Construction Fund remain uncertain, because its funding relied on expected casino tax revenues under the chamber’s previous budget.

Additionally, the House is now proposing to move the $172 million originally from the Literary Fund to cover teacher retirement costs, adding to the unpredictability.

Both chambers still proposed expanding a 1% sales tax to pay for construction costs; however, the House version goes further, permitting jurisdictions in Planning District 8, or Northern Virginia, to use these funds for transportation projects to address public transit needs in that region.

Among other notable budget moves, the House announced that the previously proposed $400 million one-time flexible funding was removed and replaced by a $98.4 million one-time supplement for at-risk student programs.

The amended House budget returned $10.1 million in unused laboratory school funds to the state’s main funding pool.

Both budget proposals are similar in that they fund the state’s special education line item: the House proposes $148.4 million, compared to the $150 million Lucas mentioned in her letter about the Senate’s revamped plan.

The delayed completion of the budget “puts hardship on school districts trying to get contracts out, puts a hardship on folks knowing what their actual compensation is going to be for the next year, and so we honestly would like things to get settled,” Bauer said.

House meets this week, Senate the next

The House reconvenes Thursday and the Senate is scheduled to meet in Richmond June 22. The chambers must reconcile their spending plans and approve a new budget before the June 30 deadline, or a state government shutdown — the first in the state’s history — will ensue.

Source

The updated spending plan no longer includes environmental standards data centers would need to meet in order to be exempted from the state’s sales and use tax, an issue that has stalled budget negotiations for weeks and sparked speculation about a government shutdown if the parties can’t finalize the budget by June 30.

“This budget comes through for Virginians in a real and meaningful way without introducing a single new tax,” Torian said in a statement. “It anticipates future federal funding cuts by establishing a reserve – so when Washington turns its back again on Virginians we are prepared to step in.”

The dueling House and Senate budget proposals differ over whether data centers should continue to be exempt from the state’s 5.3% sales and use tax. State data shows the industry saves about $1.6 billion annually through the exemption, money Senate lawmakers say the state should recoup by ending the tax break.

Data centers have to routinely upgrade and replace pricey computer equipment, which is the bulk of where they save with the exemption.

The new House proposal removes the that would have mandated developers limit data centers from co-locating with power facilities that emit carbon emissions.

The previous proposal also outlined energy efficiency requirements for the digital warehouses, including using newer backup generator models that emit less carbon.

The instead proposes creating a commission of stakeholders and lawmakers to study the impacts and benefits of the data center industry in Virginia.

The commission would be required to report to the General Assembly by Nov. 1 on ways to ensure energy demands don’t put extra costs onto residential utility customers. The commission would also scrutinize local tax revenue impacts and “other ways to generate revenue from the industry”.

“(It will be a) full investigation into energy costs, financial impacts,
 air quality, water conservation, renewable energy, and community impacts,” Scott said, “So the 2027 General Assembly can pass real national reform. Or if the governor would like, we could come back right after that report … for a special session.”

Scott has staunchly supported preserving data centers’ exemption, he said,�� because of the local tax revenue the centers generate and the that come with the construction of the facilities.

Gov. Abigail Spanberger has also publicly supported keeping the exemption, saying the state should “honor its commitments” to businesses that have located in the commonwealth. She praised the updated House budget on Friday.

“This proposal creates a clear roadmap for evaluating the impact of the data center industry in Virginia and for reassessing the state’s incentives into the future, with a focus on fairness to ratepayers and the needs of local communities,” Spanberger said in a statement.

Senate members’ response to the updated House budget was unclear Friday afternoon, with no comment from Finance Chairwoman Sen. Louise Lucas, D-Portsmouth.

Lucas has been adamant about ending the tax exemption for data centers since the Senate spending plan was introduced earlier this year.

“I want (the money) to go towards hard working families. We’ve got people who are struggling to put food on the table, to put a roof over their heads, pay for their car payment, their kids school. I want that money to go back to them,” Lucas said then.

The House is slated to return to Richmond to debate this proposal on June 18, while the Senate, who has not yet released an updated budget proposal, will return on June 22. If a budget is not passed by the end of the month, state services and employee pay will be interrupted.

Source

Rocovich stated in a four-page letter addressed to the Secretary of the Commonwealth that he will not resign before his term ends on June 30, 2027. There was no sign of him at the board’s committee meetings on Monday in Blacksburg.

Spanberger’s decision is the latest effort by her administration to shake up governing boards at Virginia’s colleges and universities, amid concerns within the higher education community about the politicization of public university governing bodies. She recently appointed four new members to Tech’s governing board.

Spanberger removed Rocovich, citing “misconduct” in a letter sent last Wednesday, but the letter did not specify the details of Rocovich’s alleged violations, only stating that the findings provided “sufficient cause” for his removal. Rocovich pushed back on that claim.

“I was appointed to serve a term, I have served that term faithfully, and I intend to fulfill my obligations to the students, faculty, and people of Virginia who depend upon the proper governance of this great university,” Rocovich wrote. “Governor Spanberger’s letter failed to state my specific cause, as the law requires. I am confident she will find no such grounds.”

Board member Will Holtzman, who was appointed by former Gov. Glenn Youngkin and will complete his term next year, said he was “disappointed” with the governor’s decision.

“I think all of us were disappointed because I think it’s a unanimous feeling of our group that he has done a phenomenal job, and I didn’t understand at all why she removed him, and I don’t think there was any cause for it,” Holzman said.

Lawmakers have also urged the governor to explicitly state her reasons for the termination.

Senate Republican Caucus Chair Mark Obenshain, R-Harrisonburg, said Rocovich deserves “fairness,” and emphasized that transparency is “not optional” concerning the governor’s decision to boot Rocovich from the board.

“What makes this decision especially disappointing is that Governor Spanberger campaigned on a promise to depoliticize higher education governance and to reduce executive involvement in the affairs of Virginia’s universities,” Obenshain said in a statement on Friday. “Removing the sitting rector of Virginia Tech without publicly stating a lawful basis appears inconsistent with those commitments.”

Edward Baine, executive vice president of utility operations and president of Dominion Energy Virginia, who was appointed to replace Rocovich, attended the first committee meeting on Monday.

He did not comment on his appointment on Monday morning, but asked Provost Julie Ross about the university’s efforts to address enrollment, which the board expressed interest in growing.

Rocovich’s dismissal followed the board’s vote to grant an exception allowing him to serve a third one-year term as rector during the search for Virginia Tech’s next president, following Tim Sands’s departure in April, Cardinal News reported last month.

The board minutes noted that Rocovich was elected rector because no other nominees were available and he was willing to serve.

A native of Roanoke and a Virginia Tech graduate, Rocovich founded a law firm and specializes in taxation as well as trusts and estates law. He served on the board of visitors from 1997 to 2005, was appointed for a term from 2010 to 2014, and was rector from 2002 to 2004.

According to the Virginia Public Access Project, Rocovich has donated to several Republican campaigns and candidates, including formerRepublican gubernatorial nominee and Spanberger rival Winsome Earle-Sears.

In his letter, Rocovich criticized the termination and the governor, expressing his “disappointment” with her use of a “subordinate“ to deliver the message, which he said was the opposite of the respect he showed Spanberger by calling her directly to discuss the board.

“Virginia Tech deserves better than to be made a political football,” Rocovich wrote. “I have given too much of my life to this institution to stand by silently while its independence is threatened—regardless of which party holds the governor’s office.”

The governor and attorney general’s offices did not immediately respond for comment on whether they will enforce the termination.

The board’s committee meetings continued on Monday. The board will have a full meeting on Tuesday. The body will vote on a new rector and vice rector to replace Rocovich and Sandy Davis, who died on March 17.

Source

The House of Delegates is scheduled to reconvene its special session June 18 at 10 a.m., followed by the Senate on June 22 at noon, as budget that can pass both chambers and reach Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s desk before the June 30 deadline.

Failure to enact a budget before the new fiscal year begins would result in a government shutdown, creating fiscal uncertainty for state agencies, local governments and school divisions that depend on state funding. Spanberger has repeatedly warned against allowing negotiations to extend beyond the deadline.

“It’s absolutely unacceptable if the General Assembly would allow for the state to go past July 1,” .

Lawmakers have remained at since the regular 2026 General Assembly session ended without a budget, despite Democrats controlling both chambers of the legislature. A special session in April also ended .

The biggest sticking point is a Senate-backed to begin the state’s sales and use tax exemption for data centers before it expires nine years from now.

Senate Finance and Appropriations Committee Chair Louise Lucas, D-Portsmouth, has argued the fast-growing industry places increasing demands on Virginia’s electrical grid and water resources while producing relatively few long-term jobs.

Spanberger and have opposed ending the incentive prematurely, arguing it could damage Virginia’s reputation with businesses and discourage future investment.

The tax exemption was approved in 2008 and is authorized through 2035. Lawmakers originally estimated it would reduce state revenue by about $1.5 million annually. Today, its value is estimated at nearly $2 billion a year, as Virginia has become the world’s largest data center market.

Spanberger said she is open to discussions about what happens after 2035.

“There are efforts afoot in the General Assembly, as it relates to the budget, to ensure that data centers are paying their fair share, as I think everyone broadly agrees is necessary,” Spanberger in mid-April. ”And so that will continue to play out in those negotiations.”

But the governor said she opposes changing the policy before the exemption lapses.

“If Virginia were to take an adversarial stance towards any particular industry, it sends the wrong signal broadly, and we’re already seeing it with the decision to move away from the tax abatement,” she in an interview published last week.

“It is the absolute prerogative of the General Assembly to look towards the future and to have conversations about incentives they do or do not want to give into the future.”

She also warned that ending the incentive early could invite legal challenges.

“As governor, I’m not going to break a contract that the state has signed — one, because who’s going to fund those lawsuits when we have to defend ourselves from broken contracts?” Spanberger said.

The dispute has put the governor at odds with Lucas, one of the Senate’s most powerful members.

, formerly Twitter, Lucas blamed the administration and House Democrats for the continued stalemate.

“The Governor and the House are the ones that are gambling with our future by allowing the data centers to expand without concern for power, water, or paying their fair share of taxes,” Lucas wrote.

“The Governor should be honest and tell the public what she won’t do — she won’t tax billion dollar corporations to provide long term revenue to help pay for K12 and public safety and to backfill the federal cuts from Trump.”

“That’s the budget hold up!! Once again, the Governor is wrong on the policy and knows Virginians will cook her if there is a government shutdown.”

Lucas has repeatedly defended the Senate proposal during budget discussions.

At a Senate Finance Committee meeting in May, the state should not continue providing the incentive without additional policy changes.

“Data centers will employ very few permanent jobs for a sizable tax giveaway,” Lucas said.

“This is imperative to encourage responsible growth in the commonwealth to protect our electric grid and natural resources, while also ensuring hard working Virginians are not asked to pick up higher utility costs to fund a higher share of our existing core services,” she added.

Despite the disagreement, Lucas said at the time that she expects lawmakers to reach a deal before the new fiscal year begins.

“Virginia will have a budget by June 30,” she said. “We will have to get this right for Virginians.”

Meanwhile, state officials are preparing to aid negotiations.

Earlier this month, state finance officials to roll out a revised revenue forecast that will include projections through fiscal year 2031. The administration said the updated forecast is intended to give budget conferees a clearer picture of the state’s fiscal outlook.

“When making long-term budget commitments, it is important that policymakers have the most current and accurate information available,” Spanberger said in a statement. “This updated forecast will help provide budget conferees and the public with greater confidence as negotiations continue on the commonwealth’s next two-year budget.”

The request came as Virginia Secretary of Finance Mark Sickles that parts of the state’s economy are showing signs of weakness.

During last month’s meeting of the Senate’s money committee, Sickles pointed to slower job growth, persistent inflation and declining consumer confidence, even as state revenues continue to exceed expectations.

Those stronger revenues have given negotiators additional room as they work toward a budget agreement before July 1.

Source

The focus on reinvesting express lane revenue is reflected in the estimated $46.5 million the commonwealth expects to generate from its express lanes, which are designed to mitigate congestion through alternative traffic lanes.

The Office of the Virginia Secretary of Transportation said in a statement that one of its core goals is maximizing the benefits and value of Virginia’s existing infrastructure, including express lanes in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads.

Rising operating and labor costs threaten the stability of transit funding in Virginia, underscoring the urgency of reinvesting toll revenue into public transportation.

“Governor (Abigail) Spanberger has clearly said that affordability is a primary goal for this administration,” the office stated. “Offering affordable transportation choices looks different across Virginia and for different Virginians. But for much of urban and suburban Virginia — one way of providing transportation affordability means expanding fast and reliable transit options.”

The , operated in partnership with the commonwealth and the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission for the past 10 years, has helped take cars off the road and move commuters onto express lanes.

The program also invests toll revenue to improve transportation options and reduce congestion, including transit.

“There’s an incredible benefit of putting express lanes and transit together,” said Kate Mattice, NVTC executive director, during the May 19 Commonwealth Transportation Board work session.

“The ability to take 50 people who otherwise would be in a car, either in the general purpose lanes or in those express lanes paying tolls, could be sitting in a single bus. And so the program that we have here is a way to effectively remove vehicles, which means both for the general purpose lanes as well as the express lanes is the ability to be moving things more reliably.”

Arlington County Board of Supervisors Chair Matt de Ferranti told the board during last week’s work session that transportation is about “the people.”

“There are many residents in different parts of the commonwealth who are walking, biking, or taking transit and the buses,” de Ferranti said. “We certainly saw it through COVID that so many of the heroes in our community were taking the bus and Metro.”

As government interest in using toll funds for public transit grows, the Virginia Department of Transportation has pushed back on cost-related objections by noting that most trips are toll-free because of HOV and transit exemptions.

Data shows 55% of users pay no toll on Interstate 66 inside the Beltway Express Lanes, meaning more than half of trips are toll-free. Similarly, 55% pay no toll during morning hours on I-95 express lanes from Exit 166 to Exit 169 in Fairfax County.

Other concerns include whether express lanes are beneficial and whether drivers improperly switch their Flex Pass to HOV mode to avoid tolls. A Flex Pass allows drivers to save on lane use or ride for free when enough passengers are in the vehicle.

VDOT said it is adding more cameras and automated enforcement to detect misuse.

On the other hand, the agency said express lanes offer ”significant benefits for economic competitiveness and travel reliability” by reducing travel times, incentivizing carpooling and managing congestion through pricing.

“Express lanes work best when many of the people in them ride in carpools or buses,” the secretary’s office stated. “We will work with stakeholders in our existing express lanes, and the soon-to-open lanes in Hampton Roads, to maximize the benefits by maximizing carpooling and transit use.”

The board took no action on the presentation but instructed staff to improve communication about how express lanes work and to avoid placing them in every location.

“I think as we think about I-81 and other projects in the future, maybe we need to give more consideration to using express lanes where that makes sense,” board member Raymond Smoot said on May 19. “They don’t make sense everywhere obviously, but this has been very insightful.”

Source

“It’s something that you don’t necessarily notice, or don’t notice when it’s missing — until you need it,” she said.

As a state lawmaker, she knew the next window of opportunity to update the state’s uniform building code would come in 2026. The process, where public health, safety and efficiency standards can be set for future construction, happens every three years.

At the state’s May 11 Board of Housing and Community Development meeting, it advanced the Northern Virginia lawmaker’s . After the public has the chance to weigh in, there will be a final vote on the measure.

Bennett-Parker also planned to submit a proposal to include , which resemble the ones for babies, albeit a bit larger. But she learned that Virginia’s code was already being updated to include it. The adult-sized stations can help people with mobility challenges or disabilities.

As she worked on drafting her proposal, Bennett-Parker posted in various parents-focused Facebook groups where she said she was “inundated very quickly with lots of stories.”

The experiences reflected a “public health issue,” Bennett-Parker said, because without changing stations, caregivers must often choose between using a restaurant table, limited bathroom counter space or the “dirty floor” to tidy up their infants.

“I think some people think ‘oh just go change your baby in your car,’” she said. “But that only works if you have a car.”

As respondents weighed in on social media to Bennett-Parker’s prompts, they shared anecdotes about keeping “puppy pee pads” in their diaper bags to use as disposable mats to lay babies on.

“I can’t even count the number of times where this happened to me or where I’ve encountered a fellow parent in this situation,” Marta Schantz wrote. “I’d often be judged by fellow bathroom-goers, but where else are parents supposed to change our kids’ diapers?”

Crystal Martin relayed that she’s experienced about 60 to 70% of women’s bathrooms having changing stations while only about 10% of men’s bathrooms have them.

Men echoed the issue when Bennett-Parker first presented her proposal to the state board last October, and signaled support by raising their hands.

Though the requirement will entail extra costs to developers, Bennett-Parker said she didn’t get much pushback on that front because “in the grand scope of things, this is a fairly minimal expense.”

, the leading brand for wall-mounted changing stations, typically retails for under $300 dollars per table, though some can cost over $1,000.

Virginia will be among 16 states that have implemented or are considering requiring along with 10 states that have required .

“A bunch of other states have done this, so I am happy we are joining them,” Bennett-Parker said.

Editor’s note: This story has been corrected to reflect that the proposal to require diaper-changing stations in all newly constructed buildings has advanced but must still receive public feedback and the Board of Housing and Community Development’s final approval before it is added to the state’s building code.

Source

The mixed actions frustrated and baffled some Democratic lawmakers who argue Spanberger is sending conflicting signals on immigration enforcement and other legislative priorities during a period of growing fear surrounding ICE operations across Virginia.

The moves highlighted the careful line Spanberger has tried to maintain during her first six months in office. She has  criticized federal immigration enforcement tactics while resisting proposals she argues could create legal conflicts, public safety concerns or unintended consequences.

The immigration decisions came alongside a wider set of vetoes touching on legal cannabis retail, prescription drug regulation, election administration, higher education governance and criminal justice policy — angering some Democratic lawmakers and advocacy groups that had expected more support from a Democratic governor.

Mixed immigration signals

Among the most controversial vetoes were �����Ի���, companion measures focused on courthouse security procedures, attorney access and electronic device policies in Virginia courthouses.

While the legislation itself focused on courthouse operations and attorney access, some supporters and immigrant-rights advocates previously argued the measures could also help reduce fears surrounding immigration enforcement activity at courthouses.

But Spanberger rejected the measures, saying she was unconvinced they would improve safety.

“Without additional study or a clear public safety benefit, I do not support mandating new statewide security screening exemptions for attorneys at courthouses,” the governor — a former law enforcement official herself — wrote in her veto statement.

“Any such statewide changes to security protocols should be based on clear evidence that such changes would have no impact on — or ideally, improve — public safety.”

The decision drew immediate criticism from Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, who is an attorney, and the legislation’s sponsors, Sen. Saddam Azlan Salim, D-Fairfax, and Del. Karen Keys-Gamarra, D-Fairfax.

In a joint statement, the lawmakers said they were “deeply disappointed” by the veto and argued the governor misunderstood both the legislation and existing courthouse practices.

“The governor’s stated concern, that allowing attorneys to bypass security screening poses a public safety risk, misreads both the bills and the people they cover,” they said, arguing attorneys are licensed professionals subject to Virginia State Bar discipline and criminal penalties for the misuse of credentials.

The lawmakers also noted that law enforcement officers already routinely bypass courthouse screening procedures.

“The very population the current system trusts to skip screening has a documented misconduct rate higher than the population the governor’s veto deems too risky to extend the same courtesy,” they said.

They also argued that the veto preserves what they described as a “scattershot patchwork of local rules” that creates confusion and delays for attorneys and clients statewide.

On Wednesday, Spanberger still took several steps aimed at addressing concerns surrounding federal immigration enforcement in Virginia.

She signed �����Ի���, which increase transparency and accountability requirements for law enforcement officers operating in the commonwealth. The legislation comes amid national scrutiny over federal immigration agents conducting operations while masked or without visible identification.

“Law enforcement officers wearing masks on American streets undercut basic expectations of accountability, sow fear and confusion, and erode the public trust,” Spanberger said in a statement.

The governor said Virginians had witnessed “the horrors of what can occur when masked federal immigration enforcement agents engage in fear-based policing and enforcement theater on American streets.”

Executive order addresses ICE activity

Also on Wednesday, Spanberger issued , directing state agencies and institutions to establish guidance for employees interacting with federal immigration officers at sensitive locations including schools, hospitals, courthouses, polling places and commonwealth attorneys’ offices.

The order bars state property from being used as a staging area, processing site or operational base for federal civil immigration enforcement activity. It also requires state agencies to verify federal officers seeking access to state property possess valid warrants or other legal authorization.

The order additionally directs state agencies to create online resources explaining residents’ legal rights and allowing reports of alleged misconduct by federal agents.

“Kids in elementary school are afraid to get on the bus, neighbors fear being targeted based on their appearance at the grocery store, and workers are not showing up at their jobs,” Spanberger said. “Public trust in state and local law enforcement is being undermined by the aggressive tactics used by federal immigration officials.”

The executive order follows Spanberger’s veto of �����Ի���, legislation supporters said was intended to further limit immigration enforcement activities in sensitive areas.

“We strongly disagree with Gov. Spanberger’s veto of SB 351. This is a disappointing choice that undermines public safety and accountability in Virginia,” said Salim, the sponsor of the Senate measure.

“This bill is a common-sense measure that would have protected Virginians and strengthened trust in our institutions. As an immigrant who carries his passport card as many immigrants do, I know the fear of being separated from our families due to the Trump administration’s lawlessness.”

The American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia also criticized Spanberger’s decision on the legislation, arguing the governor undermined protections lawmakers intended to create for immigrants and courthouse visitors.

“Lawmakers recognized that when ICE agents can make warrantless arrests inside Virginia courthouses, the rule of law itself is under attack — so they took decisive action to protect it,” ACLU of Virginia Policy Director Chris Kaiser said in a statement.

“It is shocking that Gov. Spanberger would choose to veto the protections these bills would have provided and replace them with an executive order that does nothing to keep Virginians safe.”

Spanberger acknowledged the concerns behind the legislation but said the bills would create unworkable legal conflicts for local officials and security personnel.

“As a former law enforcement officer, I share many Virginians’ concerns regarding the dangerous and unchecked federal immigration enforcement actions we have seen across the country,” she wrote.

But the governor said the bills would place security staff and law enforcement “in the untenable position of choosing between violating state law or federal law.”

She also warned the legislation would create a false sense of legal protection for immigrant families.

The actions build on earlier immigration-related measures  last month, including legislation limiting cooperation agreements between local jails and ICE.

Broader vetoes frustrate Democrats

Immigration bills were only part of a much larger wave of vetoes that angered Democratic lawmakers and advocacy groups this week.

On Tuesday, Spanberger  that would have launched Virginia’s adult-use cannabis retail market, delaying legal marijuana sales in the commonwealth for at least another year. She also  establishing a Prescription Drug Affordability Board intended to lower certain medication costs statewide.

The governor also vetoed , dealing with voter roll maintenance, saying she supported the bill’s intent but worried it could create unintended burdens for grieving family members of deceased voters.

She rejected , which would have restructured  program, arguing the changes could strip nearly 800 businesses of eligibility and reduce SWaM spending by at least $340 million.

Spanberger also vetoed �����Ի���, saying the proposals would create inconsistent legal standards involving defendants with mental illness or developmental disabilities.

Other vetoes include , dealing with private funding and gifts for election administration;�������Ի���, which would have added menopause and perimenopause protections to the ;��, involving mandatory recordings of child welfare interviews; and �����Ի���, which proposed changes to higher education governance that Spanberger said risked further politicizing Virginia universities.

“I support the intent of many of the bills I am vetoing,” Spanberger said in a statement summarizing her actions, “however, it is my responsibility as governor to make sure all new laws can be successfully implemented and protect against unintended consequences that harm Virginians.”

At the same time, Spanberger highlighted major legislation that she did sign this year, including measures ,�� and addressing , healthcare and �����ڴڴǰ��岹���������ٲ�.

“With the chaos out of Washington continuing to raise prices and create uncertainty for families and businesses alike, we have shown Virginians that we can deliver to make our communities safer, stronger, and more affordable for all,” the governor said.

Source

The governor previously expressed support for the bills that would allow more Virginia public workers to organize in unions and negotiate their working conditions and pay rates.

Spanberger first sought amendments to and , which one of the bill’s carriers, Senate Majority Leader Scott Surrovell, D-Fairfax, characterized as “a total rewrite.” On Thursday, Surovell confirmed the governor told him in a private call she planned to veto the measure.

The proposal, backed by the Virginia Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and various labor groups, would expand on a 2020 law that permits local government employees in Virginia to opt-in to collective bargaining if their localities allow it.

“I put forth amendments which would have required the state to set up a system allowing state employees, home care workers, and higher education service employees to enter into collective bargaining agreements first, in order to demonstrate the efficacy of this new system, with public employees in localities following closely after,” Spanberger said in a explaining her veto.

The governor’s action came just over three weeks after legislators rejected her recommendations in their in Richmond on April 22.

Some Virginia counties and cities have allowed public school teachers, city hall janitorial staff, firefighters and other workers to do this and the proposed measure would have made it possible statewide.

Spanberger seemed on board with the bills, lawmakers said, and had attended a SEIU rally in Richmond in February in support of them.

Surovell said that he and fellow Democratic Fairfax County lawmaker Del. Kathy Tran, who carried the House version, compromised aspects of their bills during the legislative session as part of the process to get it to Spanberger’s desk.

But “when the session was over, (Spanberger) came up with an entirely new bill,” he said. “It’s kind of hard to negotiate when the goal post gets put on a different field.”

Spanberger’s proposed changes sought to delay provisions of the bill until 2030 and shift authority over how the system operates to a state board.

Thursday afternoon,�� Spanberger defended the changes she’d suggested for the bill.

“While preserving the enrolled bill’s focus on allowing public employees to achieve collective bargaining, my amendments would have also provided additional flexibility for public employers to take into account existing local budget timelines and processes,” she wrote.  “However, the General Assembly rejected these amendments.”

Workers call veto ‘a betrayal,’ Hashmi reaffirms support of bills

With a May 23 deadline to take final actions on remaining legislation, SEIU members crashed a bill signing Spanberger attended earlier this week to urge her to sign the collective bargaining bills.

On Thursday ahead of the formal veto, Virginia Professional Firefighters, who’d been at their association’s biannual convention in Henrico County, stepped away to protest Spanberger’s planned veto.

Kurt Detrick, the new incoming president of the union association, called the governor’s actions “an absolute betrayal” after the conversations and advocacy the association has been part of with other unions throughout the legislative session.

He noted that Virginia’s firefighters and other groups had also lent their input and support when Surovell and Tran advanced their proposal to former Gov. Glenn Youngkin. That too, faced a veto.

Of Virginia’s roughly 11,000 firefighters, Detrick said about 8,000 to 9,000 of them still don’t have seats at the table because their localities have not opted in.

Many of these public safety workers want to push for safe staffing levels, which they hoped the bills’ success could enable them to do, Detrick said.

This would ensure that more staff are on duty at the same time to respond to emergencies. It would also require localities to pay more, a key concern for opponents of the bargaining bills.

House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore, R-Scott County, said that his caucus has “made repeatedly clear, this bill would have driven up local taxes unsustainably.”

Tran’s and Surrovell’s new law would have mandated localities allow for collective bargaining, although there was also language to allow localities to reject the mandate if they lacked the local funding to handle it.

The Virginia Public Sector Labor Coalition, which includes SEIU and Virginia’s firefighters, also issued a press release calling Spanberger’s expected veto “Orwellian,” because she had previously expressed support for the bills.

The labor coalition also chalked up the governor’s rejection of the bills to pressure from local leaders. Local officials from all regions of the state sent the governor of collective bargaining on Monday.

Thursday evening, Virginia Lt. Gov. Ghazala Hashmi, who was elected alongside Spanberger on the Democratic statewide ticket last fall, restated her support for the collective bargaining bills, a stance at odds with the governor’s position.

“Virginia’s workers deserve the right to organize for fair wages, worker protections, and a seat at decision-making tables,” Hashmi wrote. “I am determined and optimistic that Virginia will make collective bargaining available to public sector unions.”

The first-term lieutenant governor, a career educator and former state delegate said she would “continue to fight for legislation that lifts up public servants.”

Spanberger’s office has not responded to requests for comment on her veto.

Source

In a multi-state , the attorneys general argue the proposal is unlawful and would create what they describe as a dangerous loophole in federal law that has restricted the mailing of concealable firearms for nearly a century.

“This loophole puts guns in the hands of those barred by Virginia law from buying weapons, and it allows people to blatantly dodge background checks and access illegal firearms,” Jones said in a statement. “The federal government continues to undermine the law and (is) putting our communities at risk in the process.”

The dispute stems from a issued by the U.S. Department of Justice under President Donald Trump’s administration, which concluded that a long-standing federal statute restricting the mailing of certain firearms is unconstitutional.

“So long as Congress chooses to run a parcel service, the Second Amendment precludes it from refusing to ship constitutionally protected firearms to and from law-abiding citizens, even if they are not licensed manufacturers or dealers,” the opinion stated.

The department said it would no longer enforce the law and directed the Postal Service to align its regulations accordingly.

On April 2, the Postal Service published that would conform to that guidance, prompting pushback from a coalition of states — including Virginia — that say the executive branch lacks the authority to override in 1927.

In their letter, the attorneys general contend that the statute remains valid and enforceable, noting it has never been struck down by a court.

They argue that allowing firearms to be shipped through the mail without going through licensed dealers would bypass background check requirements and increase access for people barred from owning guns, including felons and domestic abusers.

The states also warn the change could complicate criminal investigations by weakening existing firearm tracing systems. Without federal trace data tied to licensed sellers, law enforcement agencies could face higher costs and new logistical challenges in tracking weapons used in crimes.

The proposal would mark a significant shift in how firearms move across state lines. Under current practice, federal law limits the mailing of concealable weapons through USPS, while private carriers such as UPS operate under their own policies and legal obligations regarding firearm shipments.

According to the letter, USPS “recognizes no statutory obligation” to ensure packages comply with varying state laws governing firearm purchases and transfers, raising concerns about enforcement gaps if the rule takes effect.

The attorneys general further argue that the Second Amendment does not require the Postal Service to permit firearm shipments, because the underlying federal law governs only the mailing of weapons, not the right to possess them.

They also point to historical precedent, noting that firearms were largely excluded from the mail for much of the nation’s history.

Beyond legal questions, the states say the proposal could carry financial consequences. They warn that state and local law enforcement agencies may need to develop new tracking systems to monitor firearms sent through the mail, adding strain to already tight budgets.

The letter outlines scenarios in which individuals prohibited from owning firearms under state law — including those with felony convictions or subject to restraining orders — could obtain weapons shipped from other states, potentially including firearms that are otherwise banned where they live.

Virginia joined a group of states led by New Jersey, New York and Delaware in signing the letter. Other states include Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia.

The debate comes amid broader national disputes over gun policy and federal authority, as states continue to adopt different approaches to firearm regulation.

In Virginia, Gov. Abigail Spanberger last month amended and signed of gun legislation, marking one of the most significant overhauls of Virginia’s firearm laws in years.

The changes clarify a ban on the future sale of certain semi-automatic “assault” firearms, restore background checks for private sales, raise the minimum age for some purchases to 21 and impose new safe-storage requirements, while also expanding restrictions on where guns can be carried publicly.

At the same time, lawmakers across the country are grappling with how firearms are bought, sold and transported, particularly as online marketplaces and interstate transactions become more common.

The Postal Service proposal remains in the rulemaking process, and it remains unclear whether or how the agency will revise the measure in response to the states’ objections.

Source

“I want to set a precedent for my kids, grandkids, nieces and nephews. I can’t tell them to go out and vote if I can’t do it myself,” King said in a to Virginia’s American Civil Liberties Union website, the organization that represented him and others in the class action lawsuit challenging Virginia’s restoration of rights process. “I want to set an example. The world is in uproar and chaos right now. It’s about trying to make things right.”

A federal court ruled earlier this year that Virginia’s current disenfranchisement of anyone with felony convictions violates laws that required former Confederate states to guarantee voting rights for newly-emancipated Black residents.

The series of laws, called the , had barred states from constitutionally disenfranchising people other than those convicted of crimes considered common law at the time. Under current law, however, unless they’ve petitioned a governor successfully.

The federal judge had originally given state officials a May 1 deadline to make sure that many of today’s crimes don’t strip voting rights. A new joint filing last week between King’s lawyers and the Office of Attorney General Jay Jones, grants an extension to June 1.

“We are committed to working with the Commonwealth to implement this historic expansion of voting rights and ensure newly eligible voters know their rights have been restored,” said ACLU attorney Vishal Agraharkar. “It’s past time for us to finally and formally right this wrong.”

Groundwork for a constitutional amendment

The legal back and forth represents a multiyear effort to ensure people who are done serving time can participate in the democratic process again.

King’s lawsuit challenged Virginia’s historic disenfranchisement by targeting former Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin, who’d adjusted a once-automatic process to restore voting rights when someone finishes their sentence.

Two previous governors had streamlined that process before Youngkin switched the process to petition-based. With little clarity on what would garner a successful petition, under his tenure.

Concurrently, state lawmakers advanced an effort to into the state’s constitution. Having cleared the legislature two years in a row, it will appear on statewide ballots this November — meaning King and others will be able to vote to change the constitution that had once disenfranchised them.

“Voting to me means that my voice is being heard,” King said. “It means that I am fulfilling my obligation as a citizen of this state and of this country.”

When Gov. Abigail Spanberger signed the measure to advance the amendment to a ballot referendum earlier this year, she said: “When Virginians have paid their debt to society, they deserve to regain their right to vote.”

As state agencies work to formally define the list of crimes that may qualify or disqualify past offenders, June 1 will become the first day of eligibility for some to register to vote without first needing a governor’s approval. Details on how to register to vote are available on the .

Source