“I have made it very clear that I support a yes vote, and I think Virginians should vote ‘yes,’” she told reporters outside the Executive Mansion in Richmond. But, she added, “my priority and my responsibility is on governance.”

The governor has until midnight on Monday to act on hundreds of bills that the General Assembly sent to her desk last month.

, set for April 21 with early voting already underway, would temporarily allow Virginia to redraw its congressional districts mid-decade — a departure from the once-per-decade redistricting cycle — in response to aggressive map changes in other states encouraged by President Donald Trump.

Supporters say the move is necessary to maintain partisan balance nationally, while critics argue it risks politicizing the process.

A recent highlighted the tight divide among voters, with 52% of likely voters saying they’re in favor of the measure. The findings underscore both the significance of the vote and the uncertainty heading into the final weeks before the election.

Spanberger dismissed suggestions that her approach has been too restrained compared with other Democratic leaders, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who for a redistricting-related ballot measure in his state last year.

That measure, expanded reforms tied to independent redistricting oversight and was framed as a response to partisan gerrymandering concerns nationwide.

“I would argue that a second-term governor taking up an issue that’s important to him, that’s his choice,” Spanberger said of Newsom, drawing a contrast with her own position as a brand-new governor less than 90 days into her tenure: “It’s very different from a first-term governor, literally at the end of her first session.”

She pointed to significant spending already backing the referendum, including “seven-figure ad-buys” featuring her directly addressing voters.

“There’s over a million dollars worth of TV ads with my face on it,” Spanberger said. “And at the same time, my priority is doing the job that I told Virginians I want to do, which is governing.”

The governor’s balancing act comes as she faces mixed political headwinds. The Washington Post-Schar School poll also found her approval rating at 47%, with 46% disapproving and 7% undecided — a tightening margin that has drawn national attention.

Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, the dip as “stunning” in early coverage of the poll, noting that such numbers could complicate her standing within the Democratic Party as national attention intensifies.

Spanberger brushed aside concerns about the polling, emphasizing her electoral mandate and ongoing work in office.

“If everybody hated me, why is everybody putting my face on their mailers for the referendum?” she said. “What matters to me in the end is what I am delivering for people.”

She added that criticism of her approach “seems to run at odds with the fact that everybody thinks I’m a convincing character in whichever way they want that referendum vote to go,” seemingly referencing a GOP-funded featuring Spanberger and former President Barack Obama that critics decried as misleading.

Spanberger reiterated Wednesday: “For the record, the misinformation’s strong. I voted ‘yes’ and encouraged other Virginians to do the same.”

National and state Democrats are also ramping up public engagement efforts in the final stretch before the vote.

On Thursday evening, Roland Martin is set to host a live “Vote Yes” town hall at Virginia State University, featuring House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, U.S. Sens. Mark Warner and Tim Kaine of Virginia, Virginia House Speaker Don Scott, and U.S. Rep. Jennifer McClellan, D-Richmond.

The event, which will also be live-streamed, is expected to focus on encouraging early voting ahead of “Super Saturday,” when additional early voting access expands statewide, as supporters make a final push to mobilize voters before the April 21 referendum.

Republicans, meanwhile, have seized on the issue to mount a coordinated opposition campaign.

Former Gov. Glenn Youngkin recently criticized the referendum during an appearance hosted by Sean Hannity of Fox News, calling it “illegal and unconstitutional” and warning it would undermine the state’s redistricting framework.

Youngkin is scheduled to appear at a “Vote No Rally” in Lynchburg on Saturday alongside U.S. Rep. John McGuire, R-Powhatan, and U.S. Rep. Jen Kiggans, R-Virginia Beach. Also slated to attend are state Sens. Mark Peake, R-Lynchburg, and Luther Cifers, R-Prince Edwards, and Del. Wendell Walker, R-Lynchburg.

McGuire and Kiggans are among the Republican incumbents whose districts would become more competitive if the referendum passes.

The politics around it have put Spanberger in a delicate spot — one that analysts say reflects both caution and the realities she’s dealing with.

Veteran Virginia political analyst Bob Holsworth said the governor’s approach is consistent with how she has handled the issue from the outset.

“She’s supportive, but at the same time, she doesn’t want to place all her political capital on it,” Holsworth said, noting that the referendum was not originally her initiative. “This was something that she almost inherited.”

Holsworth added that governing demands — including stalled — have likely limited her ability to campaign more aggressively, even as Democrats work to turn out voters.

“I think it would have been helpful if Spanberger had been more supportive,” he said, “but the reality is that she still doesn’t have a budget yet, so this has not been her highest priority.”

As early voting continues, the referendum is shaping up as both a policy question and a political test — not just for Virginia’s congressional map, but for Spanberger’s influence within her party.

“The reality is that this is about Congress, this isn’t about governing Virginia,” Holsworth said. “For someone who certainly would want to have a national profile, if the referendum doesn’t pass, she will take a significant hit from national Democrats, they will put the blame on her.”

Source

Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, the lawsuit argues that Trump’s March 31 order unlawfully attempts to reshape voter eligibility and mail-in voting by directing federal agencies to create a national list of approved voters — and limiting ballot distribution to those on that list.

“This is a blatant attempt by Donald Trump to sow confusion and distrust in our democratic processes and to influence the midterm elections for his own personal gain,” Jones said in a statement.

He added that the president’s order does not affect balloting for Virginia’s April 21 redistricting referendum. Early voting is already underway, and state leaders sought to reassure voters about the integrity of the current process.

But if left in place, the order would disenfranchise voters in the November election, Jones said.

“This fearmongering and arrogation of states’ authority is plainly unconstitutional. I’m proud to join attorneys general across the country in defending the right to the franchise and to use every legal tool available to us to stop the president’s illegal power grab,” he said.

According to the complaint, Trump’s executive order directs the United States Postal Service to transmit mail ballots only to voters included on a federally maintained eligibility list — a move the attorneys general argue would override existing state voter rolls and election procedures.

The order also threatens state officials with criminal prosecution and the loss of federal funding if they fail to comply.

The coalition contends that such directives conflict with longstanding constitutional principles that give states primary authority over administering elections.

While Congress has some authority to regulate federal elections, the lawsuit argues, the president cannot unilaterally impose sweeping changes without legislative approval.

Legal scholars and election experts have long emphasized that the decentralized nature of U.S. elections — with states and localities controlling voter registration, ballot access and vote counting — is a core feature of the system.

Disputes over election administration have intensified in recent years, particularly following the expansion of mail voting during the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent political battles over access and security.

The attorneys general argue the executive order would force states to abandon or significantly alter their existing systems for maintaining voter rolls and administering absentee ballots. All states involved in the lawsuit currently allow eligible voters to cast ballots by mail under their own laws and procedures.

State and federal law entitle all eligible voters to cast ballots and have their votes counted, the complaint states. Mail voting, the coalition notes, is widely used by voters across the political spectrum, including the president himself.

The complaint warns that states would be forced to overhaul election procedures within weeks of primary contests and just months before mail voting begins for the 2026 general election.

That compressed timeline, attorneys general argue, risks “confusion, chaos, and distrust” while potentially disenfranchising eligible voters.

The coalition’s lawsuit asks the court to block the federal government from implementing or enforcing the executive order, arguing it violates the separation of powers and unlawfully interferes with state-run election systems.

Source

The package of bills, all of which cleared the General Assembly with unanimous or bipartisan support during its 2026 session, reflects a broad push by lawmakers to strengthen emergency preparedness in schools, improve mental health resources, modernize student safety education and provide additional tools for educators working with at-risk youth.

With the governor’s signature, the measures will become law.

“As the parent of three daughters in Virginia public schools and a former federal law enforcement officer, nothing is more important to me than the safety of Virginia’s kids,” Spanberger said in a statement.

“Every Virginia parent deserves peace of mind knowing their kids are safe, supported, and set up for success — and that their school is prepared for any emergency.”

Spanberger added that the legislation is intended to give teachers and school staff the training and resources they need while reinforcing safety priorities shared by families across the commonwealth. She thanked both Democratic and Republican lawmakers for their support.

Lawmakers target threats, school readiness

At the center of the legislative package is an effort to strengthen how schools identify and respond to potential threats.

One measure, , sponsored by Del. Amy Laufer, D-Albemarle, requires threat assessment teams in K-12 schools and public colleges and universities to receive additional training on emergency substantial risk orders, often referred to as “red flag” laws.

Those orders, already permitted under Virginia law, allow for the temporary removal of firearms when someone is deemed a danger to themselves or others.

The new requirement incorporates that training into existing annual instruction, aiming to ensure school-based teams are better prepared to recognize warning signs and coordinate with courts when intervention is needed.

Lawmakers also expanded how educators are trained to support students facing mental health challenges.

by Del. Rozia Henson, D-Woodbridge, sets clearer standards for required mental health awareness training, directing school divisions to include evidence-based practices tailored to students considered at higher risk.

That includes youth affected by suicide, students with disabilities or chronic illnesses, those experiencing housing instability or foster care placement, and students who identify as LGBTQ+.

The law also makes explicit that the training cannot be used to justify discriminatory or biased treatment, while still allowing local divisions flexibility in how the instruction is delivered.

In response to the evolving digital landscape, legislators updated requirements for internet safety education.

Under , Del. Alex Askew, D-Virginia Beach, schools will incorporate expanded instruction on topics such as online privacy, responsible social media use and the risks associated with digital platforms.

The updated framework also emphasizes recognizing online exploitation and understanding the permanence of digital footprints, integrating those lessons into existing curricula rather than creating a separate course.

Another measure gives school divisions the option to equip staff with wearable panic alarm systems designed to alert emergency responders of a crisis.

, carried by Del. Shelly Simonds, D-Newport News, allows the devices to send signals directly to 911 and trigger schoolwide alerts when necessary.

The law also directs the Virginia Department of Education to establish a grant program — contingent on state funding — to help offset the cost for divisions that choose to adopt the technology, with priority given to those demonstrating need.

Beyond emergency preparedness, several of the newly signed laws focus on expanding support for students considered at risk of academic failure.

A separate bill, by Del. Delores McQuinn, D-Richmond, broadens how school divisions can use state funding targeted at those students, allowing the money to cover physical and mental health services.

That includes hiring licensed practical nurses, registered nurses and advanced practice registered nurses to work in schools, reflecting a growing emphasis on the connection between student health and academic outcomes.

Sen. Barbara Favola, D-Arlington, sponsored the companion measure, .

Another proposal, , sponsored by Del. Sam Rasoul, D-Roanoke, makes permanent a school-based initiative originally launched as a pilot program in Roanoke and Petersburg.

By removing the program’s expiration date and designating it as a statewide demonstration model, the law signals an intent to expand efforts aimed at improving school climate and reducing youth violence.

The initiative focuses on workforce development, exposure to career and technical education and building social and emotional skills, combining academic support with broader community-based services.

Sen. David Suetterlein, R-Salem, carried the companion .

Measures aim to improve safety standards and fight child hunger

In addition to education-focused legislation, Spanberger signed measures aimed at improving public health oversight and addressing child hunger.

One new proposal, , introduced by Del. Patrick Hope, D-Arlington, requires Virginia’s Board of Health to establish comprehensive regulations governing public swimming pools and other water recreational facilities.

The updated framework shifts away from narrower requirements and instead mandates broader health and safety standards for facilities, including those associated with hotels and health spas, with the goal of creating more consistent statewide oversight.

Another measure, by Del. Cia Price, D-Newport News, requires school divisions to track and report unpaid student meal debt.

Each local school board will submit annual data to the Virginia Department of Education, which will then compile a statewide report for lawmakers.

The requirement is designed to provide a clearer picture of the scope of unpaid meal balances across Virginia while protecting student privacy by prohibiting the inclusion of personally identifiable information.

The effort stems from recommendations by the and is intended to inform future policy decisions addressing food insecurity.

This latest round of bill signings comes just days after Spanberger approved of legislation focused on lowering costs for Virginians, including measures targeting health care affordability, housing supply and energy prices.

Taken together, the legislation reflects a wide-ranging approach to student safety and well-being, combining immediate emergency response measures with longer-term investments in mental health, educational support and public health infrastructure.

With Spanberger’s signature, the measures will take effect as law by July 1.

Source

In the meantime, Spanberger in a statement highlighted lawmakers’ focus on these three issues as a priority during the legislative session.

“No Virginian should ever have to choose between seeing their doctor, paying their rent or mortgage, or keeping their lights on,” she said. “I am signing this legislation to respond to the real, pressing concerns I have heard from Virginia families across the commonwealth about high costs — particularly at the pharmacy counter, in the housing market, and on their utility bills.”

While she signed some versions of bills, she noted cognates from the opposite chamber that have yet to be communicated but will be signed when they officially reach her desk.

Health care

Following through on a campaign promise, Spanberger signed a slate of bills aimed at addressing health care affordability and access, along with measures to boost housing supply and strengthen tenant protections.

After passing unanimously, Senate Bill 669 by Sen. Aaron Rouse, D-Virginia Beach, and House Bill 830 by Del. Katrina Callsen, D-Charlottesville, aim to prevent pharmacy benefit managers from inflating prescription drug costs.

Pharmacy benefit managers are the middlemen that negotiate drug prices between health plans, manufacturers and pharmacies. Critics have argued they operate with little transparency, making it hard to tell how much of their negotiated savings are passed on to consumers. Rouse and Callsen have been working on reforming PBMs in recent years.

Another unanimously supported measure was SB 405 by Sen. Louise Lucas, D-Portsmouth and HB 815 by Del. Mark Downey, D-Williamsburg. The legislation invests in Virginia’s health workforce by administering nursing scholarships.

HB 220 by Del. Patrick Hope, D-Arlington, and SB 630 by Sen. Jennifer Carroll Foy, D-Prince William will eliminate additional fees on health care premiums while HB 60 by Del. Jeion Ward, D-Hampton, seeks to prevent life and health insurance from being denied to people who have sought care for HIV or AIDS.

Housing

After a state-directed study confirmed a shortage of roughly 200,000 affordable housing units, lawmakers have spent several legislative sessions trying to address the gap. Housing affordability and increasing supply were also central to Spanberger’s campaign for governor.

HB 1227 by Del. Josh Thomas, D-Prince William, and SB 729 by Sen. Mike Jones, D-Richmond, leverage the state’s bonding authority to support the development of new affordable housing.

SB 628 by Sen. Mamie Locke, D-Hampton, and SB 527 by Del. Adele McClure, D-Alexandria, establish Virginia’s Eviction Reduction Program — a measure both women had planned to pursue through their work on the Virginia Housing Commission, where they learned the piloted diversion program was not being used as widely as intended.

SB 346 by Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg, D-Henrico, and HB 655 by Del. Michelle Maldonado, D-Prince William, aim to boost housing supply by making it easier to construct manufactured homes, which can provide a more affordable housing option but are not always granted the same approvals as other single-family homes.

All of the housing bills Spanberger has so far signed so far, or indicated she plans to sign, cleared the legislature with bipartisan support.

Energy

With energy costs a top concern for Virginians, lawmakers passed several bills aimed at lowering monthly utility bills.

Spanberger signed HB 1191, by Del. Irene Shin, D-Fairfax, and SB 377, by Sen. Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, that allows high load energy customers — such as data centers or manufacturers — to enter into agreements to invest in new substations that serve only them, shielding ratepayers from those costs.

Under these measures, customers that demand more than 20 megawatts of power and rely on transmission lines of 230 kV of power or more would pay 100% of the cost to construct the substation should they enter into an agreement with the utility and comply with local ordinances.

HB 369, sponsored by Del David Reid, D-Loudoun, addresses the process by which commercial and industrial customers of Phase I and Phase II utilities buy renewable energy certificates, or RECs, from within the regional grid operator PJM to help meet clean energy and capacity requirements.

The RECs help utilities comply with mandates under the Virginia Clean Economy Act. The legislation also provides that power purchased from nuclear and fusion energy sources would count toward meeting the law’s carbon-zero emissions requirements.

SB 505, by Sen. Creigh Deeds, D-Charlottesville, directs the State Corporation Commission to take a closer look at fuel and power purchase costs and how they affect risk for ratepayers. Fuel costs are a direct pass-through from utilities to customers, but the newly signed bill requires the SCC to ensure that the most efficient methods are being used and to consider fuel-cost sharing programs.

HB 562, also by Reid, allows electric cooperatives to establish virtual power plants to help ease potential strain on the grid during periods of extreme heat or cold. The measure enables customers with electric vehicle charging stations, smart thermostats, and battery storage to temporarily reduce demand on the grid during peak hours on a voluntary basis.

HB 889, by Shin, and SB 497, by Sen. Russet Perry, D-Loudoun, prioritizes existing transmission line corridors and state highways for new transmission siting. The Department of Transportation is also directed to make recommendations on how the state can speed up permitting for transmission lines in areas where infrastructure already exists and along highway rights-of-way.

Another Shin proposal, HB 1225, and SB 407, by Sen. Jennifer Boysko, D-Fairfax, allows Dominion Energy and Appalachian Power Company to petition the SCC to build utility-owned electric vehicle charging stations while establishing new location requirements. The bill also initiates a rulemaking proceeding by the SCC to determine appropriate distances between utility-owned fast-charging stations and privately-owned ones.

Source

More than 354,000 ballots had been cast statewide as of Monday, according to by the Virginia Public Access Project, a steady acceleration since early voting and continues through April 18.

The pace marks a sharp increase from the opening days of voting, when roughly had been cast by March 10 — a sign that engagement is picking up as the April 21 referendum draws closer.

But beneath those topline numbers, a deeper divide is emerging.

Early participation varies widely by region, with Republican-leaning areas generally posting higher turnout rates so far.

In some GOP strongholds, between 10 and 15% of registered voters have already cast ballots, outpacing many Democratic-leaning areas, particularly in Northern Virginia, where early voting infrastructure tends to ramp up later in the cycle.

At the congressional district level, the same pattern holds. Districts currently represented by Republicans are seeing stronger early turnout than those held by Democrats — an early signal of partisan intensity around that could reshape Virginia’s congressional delegation ahead of the 2026 midterms.

“I think the Democrats have to be worried,” longtime Virginia political analyst Bob Holsworth said. “They have a financial advantage, but the challenge the Democrats have here is that they don’t really have a face for their campaign.”

Local data underscores those disparities even more clearly.

Across Virginia, many of the highest-turnout jurisdictions so far are smaller, Republican-leaning counties in central and western parts of the state.

Mathews County, a strongly Republican-leaning locality on the Middle Peninsula where GOP candidates consistently get more than 60% of the vote in local, statewide and federal elections, has posted the highest early voting rate statewide, with roughly 16% of registered voters already casting ballots as of Monday.

Similar patterns are visible elsewhere, where GOP-leaning counties are exceeding statewide averages and outpacing more urban, Democratic-leaning jurisdictions.

By contrast, large Democratic strongholds — including Fairfax, Loudoun and Prince William counties — have reported significantly lower early voting rates in the first weeks of balloting, often well under 5% of registered voters.

Taken together, the early returns suggest Republican-leaning areas are currently driving turnout, both in raw participation and as a share of registered voters, while Democratic-leaning regions have been slower to engage.

Democrats dominate fundraising, but lack a clear messenger

Holsworth said that while Democrats have built a well-funded operation, they lack a central, visible figure to rally voters.

“Who’s the face of the Democratic redistricting here that’s out there campaigning for it every day?” he asked. “They have an argument, but they don’t have a face for their argument who is the absolute champion.”

That dynamic is unfolding even as Democrats dominate the money race. Millions of dollars from national sources have flowed into pro-referendum efforts.

, a progressive nonprofit, has n over the past six weeks to , the most visible pro-redistricting group. The organization also received a $5 million donation from the , a nonprofit affiliated with the network founded by Hungarian-American billionaire and philanthropist George Soros.

The Soros-linked contribution has angered Republicans, who have seized on it in their social media messaging.

“We don’t want any more Steve Descanos and Ramin Fatehis endangering our communities,” Del. Wren Williams, R-Patrick, said , referencing two Virginia Democratic local prosecutors whose campaigns Soros supported.

Holsworth downplayed the political impact of the funding source itself.

“He’s funded some Democratic commonwealth’s attorney races that have been fairly successful, at least in the location,” Holsworth said of Soros. “But I don’t think the people who are voting in this are looking at how it’s being funded, for the most part.”

Instead, he said, the core challenge for Democrats remains turnout and persuasion.

“I think that the challenge the Democrats have is they have to mobilize their base, and they have to run halfway decently with independents here,” he said. “They certainly have a chance of winning.”

Spanberger’s shift and national context

That absence has stood in contrast to similar efforts in other states.

“The distinction with California is twofold. One, California is more Democratic, but secondly, California has an active, energetic champion for this,” Holsworth said, referring to the state’s governor, Gavin Newsom, who has been a de-factor spokesman of the there.

While Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger has voiced support for the amendment and backed it up by marking her referendum ballot “yes” last week, Holsworth said she has not taken on the same high-profile role.

“Governor Spanberger said she supports it and has become more supportive, but she’s not out there putting her political capital on the line for it every day,” he said.

Spanberger’s view on the issue has evolved.

On the campaign trail last August, she said to pursue redistricting. But after casting an early “yes” vote in Henrico County on Friday — inviting the media to cover the moment — she framed her support as a response to national developments.

“I continue to support the 2020 redistricting amendment that set up a bipartisan commission,” Spanberger told reporters. “This amendment is temporary and responsive to this moment in time where we have a president who has gone to other states seeking additional congressional seats.”

The push for new maps follows a broader national movement that began after President Donald Trump urged Republican-led states to strengthen their majority in the U.S. House. The effort and has since spread, prompting both red and blue states to revisit their maps.

As Republicans Virginia’s proposal as a partisan maneuver, Spanberger pushed back.

“Had they spoken in opposition to those efforts, I would perhaps take their level of consternation with a bit more seriousness,” she said of similar moves in GOP-led states at Trump’s request.

Democrats have also leaned on national figures to help make their case.

Last week, the party sent mailers featuring former President Barack Obama urging Virginians to vote in favor of the amendment. Obama first the effort in a video released earlier this month after the Virginia Supreme Court allowed the referendum to go forward.

“Virginia, we are counting on you,” Obama is quoted on the mailer. “Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to rig the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years. But you can stop them by voting yes by April 21.”

Holsworth said that the ad could provide a boost, but not a substitute for local leadership.

“That could help, but that’s not somebody who has been running in Virginia all the time,” he said of the former president. “Who is here, actively campaigning every day for the referendum out here? And that’s what you need in a campaign.”

Opposition ramps up as GOP base shows energy

Opponents of the referendum have mounted an aggressive campaign of their own.

One group deployed and messaging to argue the proposal would weaken protections against partisan gerrymandering, sparking a heated political fight over both the substance of the amendment and the tone of the campaign.

Recent electoral results suggest Republican voters may be particularly energized.

In a special election earlier this month to fill the Virginia Beach-area seat of the late Del. Barry Knight, Republican Andrew Rice defeated Democrat Cheryl Smith , outperforming Knight’s margins in his last two elections by about five points.

The result has fueled Republican optimism heading into the referendum.

“If we could get some funds, we can win this redistricting fight in Virginia and secure the midterms for @POTUS,” Del. Karen Hamilton, R-Orange, .

Elections analyst Sam Shirazi said the referendum has become a motivating issue for GOP voters.

“I think one explanation of what happened is the Republicans are fired up and they’re upset about the redistricting referendum,” Shirazi said on of his “Federal Fallout” podcast. “At the end of the day anger is a very strong motivator to vote.”

He added that the dynamic reflects a broader pattern in Virginia politics.

“This is kind of a common thing we see in Virginia,” Shirazi said. “Republicans are upset and perhaps they are starting to organize, whereas last year they were a little bit asleep.”

Virginia Mercury reporter Charlotte Rene Woods contributed to this story. 

Source

The case comes as Virginia’s background check requirement for most private firearm sales remains invalidated following an  by a Lynchburg-area circuit court, a decision that still stands after an appellate court declined to revive the law.

Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones, who  after then-Attorney General Jason Miyares did not defend the statute, said the consequences of that decision were significant.

“My predecessor had a choice: defend Virginia’s background check law and protect our communities, or stand aside. He stood aside and put lives at risk. I fought to intervene and appeal because background checks save lives and closing the private seller loophole keeps guns out of dangerous hands,” Jones said in an email Friday.

The timing of the federal case has brought that debate into sharper focus.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Kenya Mcchell Chapman, 32, of Smithfield has  with illegally selling the firearm used in , which left one person dead and two injured, and prompted renewed concern about campus safety in Norfolk.

������ announcing the charges, the Justice Department said the defendant is accused of engaging in the unlicensed sale of firearms, including the weapon later used in the ODU shooting. Prosecutors allege the gun was sold to an individual prohibited from possessing firearms under federal law.

The federal complaint has drawn attention from gun violence prevention advocates, who say the case reflects the risks created when background check requirements are weakened or removed.

“That’s the very thing that the law was intended to stop from happening,” said Lori Haas, advocacy manager for the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, in a phone interview Friday.

“People who are prohibited from purchasing a firearm, by law, we need to make certain that they can’t buy firearms. Because look at what happened. Somebody who was prohibited by law got their hands on a firearm and caused harm and devastation to another university community.”

Virginia’s universal background check law,  under a Democratic majority and signed by then-Gov. Ralph Northam, expanded existing federal requirements by requiring most private firearm sales to go through licensed dealers, who would conduct background checks.

But in October, a Lynchburg-area circuit court judge struck down the law in a case initially focused on handgun access for people ages 18 to 20. The ruling went further, invalidating the broader private-sale background check requirement statewide.

Miyares, a Republican, did not pursue an appeal before leaving office. Jones, a Democrat, moved in December to extend the deadline so the commonwealth could continue the case.

That motion was denied, meaning the Lynchburg court’s ruling remains in effect and the law is unenforceable.

The ODU shooting

Authorities say the ODU shooting suspect obtained the firearm through a private sale after it had been stolen, a transaction that would have required a background check under Virginia law before it was struck down. The alleged shooter — Mohamed Bailor Jalloh, a 36-year-old former Virginia National Guardsman —  from possessing a firearm.

The shooting left one person dead and led to heightened concern on campus and across the region.

In response, university officials have taken additional safety measures, including a more information about their criminal histories — a significant move because Virginia law limits how public colleges handle criminal history.

 prohibits public institutions from including questions about criminal history on their own admissions applications or denying admission solely based on that information, though schools may review such records after a student is admitted if there are safety concerns.

The case has also fueled  about whether stronger background check requirements could have prevented the sale.

For Haas, the case underscores why advocates pushed for the 2020 law.

“I think the attorney general’s point is extremely valid,” she said. “It’s why the Virginia Tech families and the gun violence prevention movement fought so hard to get universal background checks.”

She added that while it is not possible to know whether the seller would have complied with the law, the requirement itself could have created a barrier.

“It would have been at least a barrier in some minds in requiring a background check of the buyer,” Haas said.

Federal charges and legislative response

The Justice Department’s case focuses on the alleged conduct of the seller, who is accused of unlawfully dealing firearms and transferring a weapon to a prohibited person.

Federal law requires individuals who are “engaged in the business” of selling firearms to obtain a license and conduct background checks. But private sellers who fall outside that definition are not subject to the same requirements, a gap that states like Virginia sought to address through broader laws.

With Virginia’s law currently struck down, that gap has effectively reopened, at least temporarily.

Even as the courts consider the future of the state’s background check requirements, lawmakers have moved to adopt new measures.

During the 2026 legislative session, Democrats  aimed at strengthening firearm purchasing requirements.

While it won’t resolve the Lynchburg case, , sponsored by Sen. Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, would create a “firearm purchaser license” issued by the Virginia State Police. Applicants would need to be at least 21, pass a background check and complete a firearms safety course. The license would be valid for five years.

Under the measure, dealers could not complete a firearm sale without verifying a valid license, effectively adding a permit-to-purchase requirement on top of existing background checks. A  by Del. Garrett McGuire, D-Alexandria, also passed.

Both bills are now headed to Gov. Abigail Spanberger and would take effect July 1 if signed into law.

The convergence of the federal prosecution, the court ruling and the legislative response has created a complex and evolving landscape for gun policy in Virginia.

Jones said he intends to continue pursuing the issue in court and emphasized the broader stakes.

“Gun violence is the leading cause of death for children, and at a moment that demanded action, my predecessor chose the gun lobby over public safety. I will not. As attorney general, I will pursue every avenue, including taking this fight to court, to defend our laws, enforce accountability, and save lives.”

Source

More than rely on state social services like Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, while about 400,000 Virginians get their health insurance through the state marketplace.

In their 2026 legislative session, state lawmakers crunched numbers to figure out how to buoy state agencies that support constituents. Though the bulk of the work concluded last weekend, they’ll reconvene next month to sort through budget differences and this year’s unique funding challenges with Gov. Abigail Spanberger.

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

Overhauling Medicaid verifications

When the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed on July 4, 2025, the legislation entailed new work requirements for certain Medicaid beneficiaries and twice-yearly verifications.

In a January presentation, Virginia’s Medicaid director Jeff Lunardi told state lawmakers that about 500,000 Virginians will be subject to the new Medicaid standards.

This also means the caseload for local DSS staff around the state is growing faster than state workers’ resources are, he said.

Medicaid is a joint state and federal program that provides health care for people with disabilities, pregnant people and low-income earners. Since Virginia became the 33rd state nationwide to expand their Medicaid program in 2018, thousands more people became eligible at different income levels who would have otherwise struggled to access health insurance.

But the ramped-up verification process means that social service staffers around the state must adjust their workflow processes to avoid backlogs.

“We need to be operationally ready by mid-September,” Lunardi said, since the Virginia Department of Medical Assistance Services needs to communicate changes with enrollees three months before the Jan.1, 2027, compliance date.

To support local social service workers around the state, former Gov. Glenn Youngkin proposed for around $18 million that could absorb some of the workload. It’s a part of his outgoing budget that state lawmakers did not change and Spanberger can consider keeping.

Likewise, lawmakers kept Youngkin’s earmark of $134 million to further support the more stringent Medicaid eligibility verification efforts Congress will require.

Lawmakers try to patch up a strained safety net

Losing Medicaid doesn’t have to mean avoiding the doctor, but it does mean that  “safety net” providers, like free clinics, will need to catch more people falling through the health care cracks.

When Medicaid patients fall off that insurance, “they don’t leave us,” Western Tidewater Free Clinic director Ashley Greene said — “They just transition to no payment offset.”

As a hybrid facility that treats both Medicaid patients and uninsured people, Western Tidewater Free Clinic is one of about 70 free clinics in Virginia that are bracing to serve more patients with fewer resources.

For instance, a Winchester-area resident who’d been working two part-time jobs lost Medicaid because he was making “a little too much,” Sinclair Health Clinic director Mercedes Abbet said. He ultimately stayed with Sinclair as his primary care provider to treat his diabetes and mental health issues, but the clinic lost Medicaid reimbursement for the services it provided to him.

Abbet said that last year Sinclair saw its highest client load since the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Seventy-seven percent of its 3,000 patients were uninsured and 22% had Medicaid.

She, along with Abbet and other free clinic directors, said they expect the number of uninsured patients to keep growing, as thousands of Virginians are at risk of losing their coverage when congressionally-manded Medicaid changes take effect in 2027.

To help clinics stay afloat, state lawmakers are proposing a $5 million increase in state funding over the next two years.

Investing in free clinics can help save Virginians some money down the line, .

This is because uninsured people are more likely to put off care until dire situations arise and they’re forced to seek emergency care at a hospital. Though hospitals treat people regardless of their ability to pay, they also negotiate with private insurers. Absorbing more of what they call “uncompensated care,” can mean higher premiums for private insurers eventually.

Greene, of Western Tidewater, said that about 75% of its patients do not end up going to ERs. If the clinic can keep that amount of people from visiting an ER, “there’s that much more room for true emergencies,” she said.

A state-level ACA subsidy program?

A congressional stalemate last fall over renewing special Affordable Care Act subsidies led to a The expiring credits further helped people living between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level purchase their own health insurance in the ACA marketplace. ACA assists those who would still struggle to buy their own private insurance plans and whose employers don’t provide health care.

Democrats have led the push to extend the subsidies, but some Republicans  to renewing them — with Virginia’s Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Westmoreland,  one of . As of press time, however, the subsidies have not been renewed and Virginia’s state budget needs to be ready to take effect by July.

State Sen. Barbara Favola, D-Arlington, called it “a very terrible situation to be in,” trying to budget for the next two years with “uncertainty” from the federal government.

Still, each chamber has pitched ideas on how to support constituents in the meantime.

Virginia’s House of Delegates has set aside $79.1 million for next year specifically to aid people between 138% and 200% of the federal poverty level.

Virginia’s Senate proposed $200 million as soon as the middle of this year, and would authorize the state ACA exchange to set up a special enrollment period.

These are options that Spanberger can consider when she ultimately signs the state budget this spring.

Keeping food on the table

Another health care hurdle Virginia is facing: reducing its error rate in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program verifications. The federal program helps disabled and low-income earners buy groceries.

Due to the reconciliation bill, states that don’t reduce their rates risk being on the hook for millions.

Youngkin had already spurred reduction efforts, but Spanberger’s administration must complete the work.

The House and Senate have so far left Youngkin’s $2.4 million for a quality assurance team untouched in their budget proposals.

The House also wants to earmark $52.3 million in extra funding to offset increased locality costs of administering SNAP due to the federal changes. The Senate proposes $2 million for the state to contract with a vendor that can help reduce error rates.

At least one vendor was already tapped last year.

Records obtained by The Mercury show a $1.7 million vendor contract for six months of audit services thatduring Youngkin’s final months as governor. The $2 million the Senate has proposed may entail a vendor for the next two years, if approved by Spanberger.

Each chamber has also set aside contingency funding if Virginia is not able to reduce its rate by certain margins.

The House proposed earmarking $211 million if the state doesn’t get below 10% and the Senate set aside $135 million, assuming the rate doesn’t drop below 8 to 10%. As she prepares to sign the budget, Spanberger will need to consider both chambers’ proposals.

The state budget must take effect by July 1. A special legislative session has been set for April 23 to reconcile the differences between the House and Senate budget plans.

Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our website. AP and Getty images may not be republished. Please see our for use of any other photos and graphics.

Source

Warner, a Democrat who has represented Virginia in the Senate since 2009, said his campaign kickoff tour focused on listening to voters concerned about rising costs and the future of the economy.

“After five days on the road across the commonwealth, I’ve heard the same message from Virginians everywhere: lower costs, get things done, and make sure our economy is ready for the changes ahead,” Warner said in a statement announcing the filing.

“My focus has always been on delivering real results for Virginia — lowering costs, creating good-paying jobs, and making sure our workers and businesses are ready to lead as technologies like artificial intelligence transform the economy. That’s the work I’ve been focused on in the Senate, and it’s the work I’ll keep fighting to deliver.”

Under Virginia law, candidates for U.S. Senate must submit at least 10,000 signatures from qualified voters — including at least 400 from each of the state’s 11 congressional districts — to qualify for the ballot.

Warner said his campaign submitted 18,036 signatures from registered voters across Virginia to the state Department of Elections in Richmond.

The filing formally places Warner on track to seek another six-year term in the Senate in the , which will take place after party primaries scheduled for Aug. 4.

Warner, 70, is one of Virginia’s most prominent Democratic figures and a fixture in statewide politics for more than two decades.

A former technology entrepreneur and venture capitalist, Warner built a fortune investing in telecommunications companies during the expansion of the wireless industry in the 1980s and 1990s.

His business success helped make him one of the in Congress.

He first won statewide office in 2001 when he was elected governor of Virginia. While in office, Warner developed a reputation as a pragmatic dealmaker who worked with Republicans to stabilize the state’s finances after the early-2000s recession.

Warner was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2008 and has since won two additional terms, including a 2020 reelection victory in which he , defeating Republican Daniel Gade.

In Washington, he has focused heavily on technology policy, economic competitiveness and national security.

Warner currently serves as vice chair of the Senate’s Select Committee on Intelligence and has worked on legislation related to cybersecurity, artificial intelligence and supply chain security.

Despite Warner’s long tenure, the 2026 race is expected to include the first Democratic primary challenge of his Senate career. He previously ran unopposed for the party’s nomination in 2008, 2014 and 2020.

Several challengers have filed to run against the incumbent in the Democratic primary, including , a member of the Spotsylvania County School Board; , a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve’s Adjutant General’s Corps; , a Falls Church investment banker and former reality television personality; and , a self-described “regular Virginian.”

On the Republican side, several lesser-known candidates have entered the race as the GOP searches for a viable challenger to the three-term incumbent.

Declared Republican candidates include , a Northern Virginia cybersecurity executive; , an economic development consultant who previously ran for Senate as an independent; retired Army Maj. Gen. ; Marine Corps Reserve Col. ; and , according to the .

The Republican field was initially expected to include a higher-profile contender after state Sen. Bryce Reeves, R-Orange, in 2025. But Reeves from the race several months later, citing a family health matter.

Warner’s reelection bid comes as he continues to play a visible role in national debates over foreign policy and the direction of the federal government.

He has been l of President Donald Trump’s military campaign against Iran, warning that the United States risks becoming entangled in a prolonged conflict without a clear strategy and that Congress should have a stronger role in authorizing military action.

Warner has also been outspoken during in Washington, including the government shutdown crisis of 2025, when lawmakers faced pressure to reach a budget agreement to restore federal services and pay for government workers.

Those issues, along with economic concerns and technology policy, are likely to shape Warner’s campaign message as he seeks another term representing Virginia in Washington.

If reelected, Warner would continue one of the longest tenures for a Virginia senator in modern history, extending a political career that began in the state’s executive mansion and has since spanned nearly two decades in the U.S. Senate.

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

The lawmakers asked federal authorities to review the legislators’ actions concerning the state-sponsored institution, which has drawn recent scrutiny from legislators, alumni and the public over concerns about alleged racial discrimination and a non-inclusive institutional culture.

The Republican lawmakers wrote to Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth that the changes could also affect VMI’s role as a federally recognized senior military college, and its training pipeline for U.S. military officers.

U.S. Republican Reps. Ben Cline of Botetourt, Morgan Griffith of Salem, Jen Kiggans of Virginia Beach, John McGuire of Goochland and Rob Wittman of Westmoreland signed the letter.

“As a veteran and VMI Mom, I am deeply concerned that the Virginia General Assembly has taken legislative action to completely reshape the fabric of this institution to fit their ideological ambitions,” Kiggans said in a separate statement.

“I stand with my Republican colleagues and VMI alumni from across the country in condemning these actions and call for the egregious state over-reach from Richmond to end.”

Three bills, sponsored by Dels. Dan Helmer, D-Fairfax, and Michael Feggans, D-Virginia Beach, are at the center of the Republicans’ ire.

���������’s would establish a VMI task force to examine higher education at VMI, and review the institution’s response to a which found “it is and was common experience to hear racial slurs among VMI cadets, including use of the n-word” and substantiated reports of sexual assault and gender discrimination at the school, among other issues.

���������’s measure also calls for the task force to explore measures VMI has taken to distance its culture from the Lost Cause, which romanticized the South’s defeat in the Civil War, and promote an inclusive environment. The task force’s findings would be due by the start of the next legislative session.

, also by Helmer, would ensure that VMI students who report acts of sexual violence receive the same disciplinary immunity as students at other public universities, aligning VMI’s policies with standard practices.

Lastly, Feggans’ would alter the composition of the 17-member VMI board: the maximum number of alumni would decrease from 12 to eight, and the minimum number of non-alumni would increase from four to six, effective July 1.

Feggans’ bill was amended after its introduction in January. In its original form, it would have dissolved VMI’s governing board and transferred oversight to Virginia State University’s Board of Visitors.

The legislative proposals also follow the governing board’s decision not to renew the contract of , the institution’s first Black superintendent. Wins that the decision “was not based on my performance or the tangible progress we achieved. It is the result of a partisan choice that abandons the values of honor, integrity, and excellence upon which VMI was built.”

In their March 5 letter to Trump and Hegseth, lawmakers argued that if the bills are successful, they would usher in changes dependent on partisan ideology that could impact national defense interests.

“If a state legislature may unilaterally restructure, politically condition, or subject a federally recognized Senior Military College to recurring review of its military mission, that precedent could apply equally to every SMC operating under Title 10,” the lawmakers wrote.

“Such actions risk weakening the uniform federal framework that governs officer development across multiple states and institutions.”

The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment about the letter and if the administration plans to intervene when it comes to VMI.

The General Assembly will adjourn on Saturday, after which the governor will review all legislation that has passed both chambers and either approve, reject or amend them.

Trump administration and Virginia institutions

While it’s uncertain if the request made by lawmakers will be taken up, the Trump administration has recently ramped up its attention to Virginia’s institutions in relation to educating senior military officers.

According to a Feb. 27 memo from Hegseth, the administration is considering several institutions to partner with to expand the Senior Service College Fellowship program, responsible for educating senior military officers. He named Virginia Tech, along with Liberty and George Mason universities as possibilities.

Hegseth wrote in the memo that several institutions, including the College of William & Mary, have failed to “sharpen our leaders’ warfighting capabilities” and have “undermined the very values they are sworn to defend.”

George Mason is also one of two Virginia institutions that have been the subject of a federal investigation dating back to last year, as part of the administration’s broader crackdown on universities’ diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

DEI programs are designed to address historic and existing inequalities, while creating fairer opportunities for everyone. Critics say the policies focus too much on identity traits like race or gender and are divisive.

George Mason faces four civil rights investigations tied to its DEI initiatives, its employment practices and treatment of students, as well as a separate probe into alleged antisemitism on campus. The school has cooperated with the probes and maintains its practices are legal and fair.

The federal government also accused the University of Virginia of violating civil rights laws in its admissions, hiring and DEI programs, and claimed its campus culture was inhospitable to Jewish students. UVA leaders refuted the claims, but in October, they with the federal agency to suspend the probes.

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

Since both the Senate and House advanced the measure, if Gov. Abigail Spanberger approves, it would take effect immediately and would dictate what and how Virginia’s public schools can instruct pupils regarding the Capitol attack, a major political event in the country’s recent history.

The attack, waged by supporters of then-Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump in response to Congress certifying that Joe Biden won the election, had wide-ranging impacts on law enforcement, public discourse about democracy, and ongoing institutional, legal, and social repercussions.

“There is real concern that the President of the United States is trying to rewrite the history of January 6, (that is) borne out by the fact there’s a whitehouse.gov site that presents a false history of what happened that day,” sponsor Del. Dan Helmer, D-Fairfax, said to the Mercury earlier during the session.

“We just want to make sure that if school boards choose to teach on January 6, that they’re not presenting the false narrative that is out there.”

Permissive and political

���������’s bill does not ban schools from teaching about Jan. 6. Instead, it requires a specific framing and bars presenting alternative interpretations or election fraud claims as credible in public schools.

Despite the seeming consensus in the legislature, the bill drew some opposition from the public. The Virginia Assembly of Independent Baptists argued that it lacked educational value and pushed a “left-wing” narrative.

“I don’t know that I agree that it is necessary to take one of the darkest days in American history and teach our young people and glorify to our young people when adults act badly,” said Michael Huffman, the assembly’s executive director, during a Senate subcommittee meeting on Feb. 19. “True education equips children for life, not political agendas, and glorifying or mandating … the dark day serves only short-sighted partisanship, not our kids’ future.”

Sheila Fury, another speaker who opposed the legislation, called it another “reason why everyone in the commonwealth should pull their children from public education” during a Jan. 27 House Education subcommittee hearing.

“This is explicit indoctrination,” Fury said.

Helmer, in response, emphasized the need to teach the truth about the event and counter about it. Some lawmakers, including Senate Education and Health Committee Chair Sen. Barbara Favola, D-Arlington, pointed out that the proposal is permissive.

“I don’t see anything wrong with this bill,” Favola said. “I think the January 6 episode, unfortunately, is something that our children should be aware of, and I think the framework is reasonable.”

In the House, Del. Jessica Anderson, D-Williamsburg, supported the legislation.

“Our courts have proven that it was an insurrection, and I want to make sure that our students are also taught those facts,” Anderson said during a Jan. 27 House Education subcommittee hearing.

The Senate and House supported the legislation on mostly party-line votes.

Next step

Spanberger will decide whether to sign the proposal into law. Her position on it is currently unclear and her office did not respond to questions about whether she will support the measure.

Before her election as governor, Spanberger represented Virginia in Congress during the attack. She called for investigations and measures to prevent similar attacks in the future.

She , “This day did not happen in a vacuum. Jan. 6 marked the continuation of a trend of falsehoods — and tragically, the lies that spawned this act of insurrection are still present in American politics.”

The governor’s office said she will “review all legislation that comes to her desk.”

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

So when state legislators recently rejected all nine governing board nominations at Richard Bland, Sydow assured the public that the institution remains on “solid footing” with an experienced leadership team.

“While the General Assembly’s recent decision regarding the prior slate of Board of Visitors appointees creates a temporary gap in formal governance, our day‑to‑day operations, strategic initiatives, and student‑centered mission continue without interruption,” said Sydow in a statement to the Mercury.

She said the institution is “optimistic” and “encouraged” over Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s forthcoming appointments, “individuals we expect will bring a strong commitment to higher education, diverse experience, and a shared belief in the vital role Richard Bland College plays in the Tri-Cities region and the Commonwealth.”

Last year, the state legislature passed a  that triggered the development of Richard Bland’s first governing board.

In total, lawmakers rejected 14 nominations by former Gov. Glenn Youngkin at three institutions in the Commonwealth this month: Richard Bland College, Virginia Commonwealth University, and Old Dominion University.

None of the rejections at VCU and Old Dominion prevented their respective boards from maintaining a quorum. Spanberger backfilled significant vacancies at George Mason University, the University of Virginia and Virginia Military Institute,  27 in January.

Virginia governors are responsible for nominating members, but their decisions must be confirmed or rejected by the General Assembly. Over the past year, the process was called into question after the Senate Privileges and Elections Committee rejected 22 nominations made by Youngkin, whose administration unsuccessfully challenged the decision.

Outside of the nominations for Virginia colleges, lawmakers over the current session have rejected 89 nominees to Virginia’s boards and commissions, including two for the Board of Education.

Others were blocked from the State Air Pollution Control Board and the Boards of Juvenile Justice and Fair Housing, as well as the African American and Asian Advisory Boards.

Potential changes

The nomination process for governing boards at Virginia’s colleges and universities remains under review by state lawmakers and Spanberger’s administration, a process which started immediately upon the governor taking office in January.

Lawmakers are now considering two bills that would revise membership and governance requirements for governing boards of public higher education institutions. They appear to be on track to clear the legislature.

, carried by Sen. Creigh Deeds, D-Charlottesville, would increase each member’s terms from four years to six, prohibit consecutive terms and require a two-year gap, and add nonvoting advisory members from faculty, staff and student bodies.

The bill also clarifies the terms “quorum,” “executive committee,” “primary duties” and “restrictions” of governing boards. Boards would also be required to adopt policies for shared governance, which a work group created by the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia will develop, fostering more voices in decision-making.

SCHEV will also be responsible for creating a work group and recommending processes for Attorney General reviews of legal representation for institutions and recusal policies for board members with conflicts of interest.

According to the bill’s fiscal impact statement, the cost of the proposed changes are expected to be absorbed within existing resources by both institutions and SCHEV.

Del. Lily Franklin, D-Montgomery, is carrying similar  in the House of Delegates, which includes proposals from Democratic Dels. Katrina Callsen and Amy Laufer, representing Albemarle.

On Jan. 17, Spanberger issued an  directing her cabinet members to prepare a report detailing the procedures for board nominations at Virginia’s public higher education institutions, including member term lengths, reappointments, term start dates for new members, and the evaluation process used by the Virginia Commission on Higher Education Board Appointments.

What’s next

Sydow said she’s confident Richard Bland’s governing board will be in place by the next April 22 board meeting, based on conversations with the governor’s office and elected representatives.

Norfolk Mayor Kenny Alexander will  Sydow in May when she steps down after 14 years at Richard Bland. Alexander has served as vice chancellor for strategic partnerships of the Virginia Community College System and as executive director of the Virginia Foundation for Community College Education.

Lawmakers will have until the weekend of March 14 to advance or kill any legislation before it heads to Spanberger for consideration.

Source

“I have always fought for all of us to have fair representation,” she said. “But this isn’t a moment we can stand on principle. We have to fight fire with fire.”

Levey, a 66-year-old Democrat, is alarmed that President Donald Trump is encouraging Republican-controlled states to rig congressional districts ahead of midterm elections this November.

Because of that, she’s willing to go back — at least temporarily — to an era when Virginia politicians drew districts for their own partisan advantage. The real-estate broker will vote yes for a Democratic gerrymander so extreme that it would deny hundreds of thousands of Virginia Republicans a chance to elect a congressional candidate of their choice.

“I certainly have empathy for them,” Levey said of Republican voters, “but the one they have in the White House is trying to take away from all of us.”

In six short years, Virginia has gone from the new darling of nonpartisan districts to teetering on the cusp of joining a nationwide, partisan redistricting war.

Voters will have what could be the last say on whether Virginia will temporarily suspend the redistricting commission and allow the Democrat-controlled state legislature to redraw Virginia’s 11 congressional districts before elections this November.

Lawmakers’ map-making powers would be temporary. After the 2030 Census, the commission would resume responsibility for drawing congressional maps. The measure would not affect state legislative districts.

The ballot question will be put to voters in a referendum held on April 21. Early voting is scheduled to begin March 6, pending the outcome of a seeking to stop the ballot measure from going forward. In an earlier lawsuit, the the constitutional amendment to proceed. The deadline for arguments in the case is set for two days after the election is held.

It’s possible that no matter what voters say, the court will have the last word.

Confusion for candidates, voters

Virginia’s possible head-spinning reversal has created uncertainty for candidates and voters alike.

When bestselling author Beth Macy decided to run for Congress, she said friends gave her a map of the 6th congressional district. She festooned it with color-coded notes marking her appearances scheduled up and down the Shenandoah Valley.

Then things changed.

Earlier this month, the Democrat-controlled General Assembly rolled out a proposed redistricting plan that would carve the Shenandoah Valley into four different congressional districts.

That leaves Macy juggling two potential maps, unsure which set of voters she ultimately will be seeking to represent.

When the Mercury caught up with Macy, she and her campaign manager were driving to Harrisonburg, which happens to overlap with the current and proposed districts.

But Macy, who lives in Roanoke, said she now has to figure out how to split her time between the Valley or follow the proposed map, which would take her to Blacksburg, Lynchburg and Charlottesville.

The uncertainty also affects voters.

The proposed map would move 48% of Virginians to a new district. And outside of far Southwestern Virginia, those now represented by a Republican would find themselves in one that would favor Democrats. This raises questions that don’t yet have clear answers.

Will Republicans in Mathews County near the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay continue to vote in a GOP-friendly district that stretches from Tidewater to the Richmond suburbs, or become part of a safe Democratic district with its population anchored all the way up in Alexandria?

Will residents of Danville along the North Carolina line continue to be part of a solid Republican district that extends north along the Route 29 corridor, or become part of a safe Democratic district with a population based in Richmond?

Virginians who want to find out what changes could be coming to their congressional districts

Comparing current and proposed maps

To understand what Virginia’s foray into mid-decade redistricting means for the average Virginian, it helps to understand the starkly different intent of the current congressional maps and the proposed ones.

went into effect in 2022 and contain the first-ever congressional districts drawn under a voter-approved constitutional mandate for bipartisan redistricting.

The redistricting commission failed to produce maps, which under the constitution gave the state Supreme Court the authority to draw districts. The court hired two experts — one Republican, one Democrat — to craft maps to reflect Virginia’s current left-of-center lean.

, the bipartisan mapmakers said their creation was well-balanced and “does not unduly favor any party.”

The court-drawn congressional maps were first used in 2022, resulting in 6 Democratic and 5 Republican representatives. That partisan split was almost identical to the way Virginians voted in the 2020 presidential election.

Virginia was one of 22 states that received an A from the Princeton Gerrymandering Project.

As a general rule concerning the current congressional maps, if you live in or near an urban area, you are likely to be represented by one of the six Democratic members of the state’s congressional delegation.

Likewise, if you reside in a largely rural area, such as the Shenandoah Valley or the Northern Neck, chances are good that you are represented by one of the five Republicans.

By contrast, the proposed Democrat map is a deliberate partisan gerrymander that seeks to limit Republican control to only one district in the state’s far Southwestern corner.

In order to achieve a 10-D, 1-R map, Democrats created five districts that originate in densely populated Northern Virginia with fingers that reach deep into sparsely populated rural areas.

Pending the result of midterm elections this fall, it’s possible that rural voters in places like the Shenandoah Valley, the Piedmont and a wide swath of Tidewater all would be represented by Democrats who reside in the Washington suburbs.

A Democratic victory in 10 districts would not be a slam dunk. Two proposed districts — and — are considered toss-ups, based on an average of statewide elections this decade for governor and president.

At the last minute, Democratic legislators rejiggered the 2nd District to make it slightly easier for them to win.

Spanberger’s apparent caution

Redistricting is a process that states typically do at the start of each decade, right after the Census updates population numbers.

But last July, Trump started the mid-decade redistricting arms race. He ordered Texas Republican lawmakers to adjust district lines to squeeze out five extra GOP seats, which could help House Republicans maintain their razor-thin majority. Soon, California Democrats announced they would seek voters’ permission to redraw maps to cancel Texas’ gains.

As other states jumped in, Virginia appeared immune from the tit-for-tat battle. With the redistricting commission enshrined in the state constitution, there didn’t appear to be sufficient time to get an amendment before voters, a process that typically takes two years.

In late October, however, Democrats reconvened a special session of the General Assembly and unveiled a timeline they claimed could shorten the constitutional amendment process to just six months. Once they cemented control of both chambers of the legislature and the victory of Democrat Abigail Spanberger in the governor’s race, Democrats had cleared all political obstacles to their plan.

Spanberger, who campaigned on her congressional reputation as a bipartisan problem-solver, initially distanced herself from Democrat’s call for a maximalist 10-1 gerrymander.

In interviews after her election, Spanberger questioned whether such an extreme redraw was necessary. She noted that her campaign had won 8 of 11 congressional districts, including the 1st and 2nd districts now represented by Republicans. She also worried that a map that sought to flip two additional Republican districts could make some existing Democrats vulnerable.

While she has never explicitly endorsed the 10-1 gerrymander, she to set a referendum for the redistricting amendment and three others saying she would let the voters decide.

National Democrats say, “Whatever it takes”

After California canceled Texas, Trump found three other states willing to join the mid-decade voluntary redraw. Missouri and North Carolina changed their maps, each expected to yield one extra GOP congressional seat in elections this November.

A third state, Florida, will hold a special legislative session on redistricting in April. That effort is expected to yield two to five more GOP seats.

The net result could swing as many as seven GOP seats.

National Democrats tried without success to recruit other states with Democrat-controlled legislatures to join California. Illinois has shown no inclination after Republican legislators in neighboring Indiana passed on Trump’s gambit. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore has failed to persuade the Democrat-controlled legislature there to wipe the state’s only GOP seat off the map.

That leaves Virginia as national Democrats’ last hope to counter Trump.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said earlier this month that national Democrats would do “whatever it takes” to ensure Virginia’s ballot initiative passes on April 21.

“We will spend tens of millions of dollars to make sure … that voters have all of the information necessary to make a decision around whether they want Donald Trump to rig the midterm elections and halt the ability for the American people to decide who’s in the majority,” CNN Feb. 15.

So far, to , a group that is encouraging a yes vote on April 21.

Virginia’s neutral congressional map makes it ripe for a partisan gerrymander.

Many other states already had drawn districts that favor one party or the other. For example, North Carolina Republicans had to squeeze hard to deliver one more GOP seat for Trump. In Virginia — which has a smaller population than its southern neighbor — Democrats think they can create four times as many blue seats.

In a , the Virginians for Fair Elections campaign features an original member of Virginia’s redistricting commission expressing his support for independent and bipartisan maps.

“But when Trump orders MAGA governors to rig their maps so he can hold onto power, we cannot sit by and do nothing,” said James Abrenio, a Democratic lawyer from Northern Virginia.

The 30-second spot says a yes vote would “restore fairness” in national elections, but sidesteps any consideration of whether it would be fair to impose a 10-1 map on Virginia Republicans.

By releasing the maps ahead of the vote, Democratic legislators say the process is transparent and that the final decision will be left in the hands of the voters.

What early polls say

Early polls suggest Democratic leaders have yet to make their case.

“We wouldn’t win if the vote were held today,” Virginians for Fair Elections warned Monday in a fundraising appeal to supporters.

Earlier that day, Roanoke College released a that found that 52% of 800 Virginians surveyed would vote against the proposed constitutional amendment, while 44% would vote in favor.

Brian Cannon, who led the successful 2020 campaign to win voter approval for the redistricting commission, noted that the Roanoke College poll showed that 61% disapproved of Trump, but only 44% would vote for the constitutional amendment.

“That is a pretty big delta,” Cannon said in an interview Tuesday.

It’s hard to know how accurate predictive polling will be because there is no past record of turnout models for a statewide ballot measure held in April.

Some Democrats who fought for nonpartisan redistricting say they will oppose rigging Virginia maps in such an extreme way.

“It’s wrong and it’s not necessary,” said Wendala Shannon, a database manager who lives in Richmond’s Museum District.

Shannon believes that Democrats could pick up two or more seats without touching the current lines.

“If I thought the Republicans had a shot, then I would be in less in the ‘Do the right thing’ camp,” she admitted. “But I don’t think they do. I think Trump is so unpopular.”

Two “no” groups organizing

Cannon is leading a bipartisan group called that is seeking to ensure there will be no lapse in the redistricting commission’s authority.

He said the goal was to raise $1 million, which is less than the Democratic ‘Yes’ group is spending a week in TV advertising.

This week, No Gerrymandering Virginia featuring a photograph of Spanberger and her 2019 tweet that condemned gerrymandering as a threat to our democracy.

“She was right on principle, and those principles still matter,” a woman’s voice says in the ad. “But now there is a proposal to set aside our independent safeguards and hand map-drawing back to politicians in Richmond. It would replace fair districts with a distorted map designed for a single party.”

Meanwhile, Republicans are gearing up for an eight-week blitz to rally opposition to the constitutional amendment.

The campaign is a test for Jeff Ryer, a longtime GOP operative who this month was named chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia.

“If their rigged maps pass, millions of Virginians would be ignored and forgotten by Democrats who only care about appeasing urban elites,” Ryer said in a Feb. 13 statement, the day the state Supreme Court said it would allow the amendment vote to proceed.

“Our message is simple: this amendment is a partisan power grab that undermines the Virginia Constitution, subverts democracy, and betrays the will of the people,” Ryer said.

One possible sign that Republicans are energized emerged this week in New Kent, where County Treasurer Charles Evelyn was so riled up that he a long message on Facebook about the redistricting question.

“I don’t usually post politics here,” said Eveyln, whose feed is filled with photos of his two young children. “Y’all know that. I’d rather argue about brisket bark or whether Duke’s mayo is superior to everything else on earth.”

Eveyln concluded with his contention that the state constitution should be a foundational document, not something you suspend temporarily depending on political expediency.

“The Constitution isn’t a weapon,” he wrote. “It’s not a loophole machine. It’s not a playbook for power grabs. It’s a restraint on everyone, especially the people in power.”

What is “fair?”

Republicans are particularly alarmed that Democrats abandoned a long-time practice of presenting constitutional questions to voters in neutral, straightforward language.

In the April referendum, voters will be asked if the state constitution should be amended to “restore fairness in the upcoming election.”

On the House floor last month, Republicans sought to amend the language, which they say is deceptive and designed to lead people to only one conclusion. But Democrats cut off debate and approved the ballot wording on a straight party-line vote.

Mark Cole, a former Republican state legislator who chaired the House elections committee for a decade, said he’d never seen a ballot question with such a loaded question.

“If it was presented honestly,” Cole said in a telephone interview, “I think the voters would vote it down.”

Democratic leaders contend the most important part of the process is that voters have the opportunity to see the maps ahead of time and decide for themselves what is fair.

“I think voters are smart enough to figure it out,” House Speaker Del. Don Scott, D-Portsmouth, said in an interview.

Voters have the first say, not necessarily the last one

When the state Supreme Court opted to allow the April 21 referendum to proceed before legal appeals were exhausted, it reserved the right to have the last say.

Two days after the ballot question, the court will receive briefs in a Republican lawsuit claiming that the ballot measure was invalid because Democrats, in their rush to speed up the process, ignored their own procedures and cut legal corners.

If voters reject the constitutional amendment, the lawsuit will be moot. Elections this fall will proceed in the existing districts that the court itself approved.

If voters approve the constitutional amendment, the court — which has long avoided becoming enmeshed in political questions — would also have an easy out if the justices find no merit in the Republican case. Elections this fall would take place in the new districts.

But if the high court finds for the Republicans, it could face an extraordinarily difficult decision. Would an appropriate remedy include invalidating the results of the just-completed election?

In one swoop, the court could second-guess the legislative branch and overturn the will of the voters.

Editor’s note: David Poole founded the Virginia Public Access Project in 1997 and served as the organization’s executive director until 2023.

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

The Senate Finance Committee’s would end a data center sales tax exemption and set the stage for the state to potentially reap millions in revenue from the industry.

The spending plan would also deliver $100 in tax rebates to individual filers and $200 to joint filers, raise the standard deduction, protect Medicaid, fund 3% annual teacher raises, invest $50 million in affordable housing and provide $205.7 million for Metro over the biennium.

The , branded the “Affordable Virginia Budget,” similarly prioritizes housing, health care and education, but diverges in some spending details — including larger direct investments in the and a broader package of worker protections and labor initiatives.

Both chambers are expected to pass their respective proposals next week — the House on Thursday — before negotiators reconcile differences in a conference committee in the coming weeks.

Notably, neither plan includes new taxes, which prompted Sen. Richard Stuart, R-King George, to vote for the Senate budget in committee, while three of his Republican colleagues abstained.

“I can’t tell you how much I appreciate the fact that there are no tax increases in this budget, that you’ve kept a very conservative forecast of revenues going forward, that we have not built the base budget, but we’re using one-time monies,” Stuart told Senate Finance Committee Chair Louise Lucas, D-Portsmouth.

“But more than that, I’ve been here for a long time, and you are the first Finance chair that I remember that actually took and listened to our considerations and our suggestions, and I very much appreciate that. And I just wanted to say that Madam Chair.”

Lucas, visibly surprised, replied: “Thank you very much, I really appreciate that compliment, I didn’t see that one coming. Where are the tissues?”

Reworking Youngkin’s final budget

Youngkin on Dec. 17 unveiled his , pitching a plan he said built on record revenue growth and sustained his administration’s tax-relief priorities as Democrats prepared to take control of both the General Assembly and the governor’s office.

The proposal anticipated continued economic strength, with what Youngkin described as a “prudent” revenue forecast rooted in job and business growth. It preserved reserve balances while advancing nearly $730 million in new, ongoing tax cuts and maintaining income tax conformity with recent federal policy changes.

On the spending side, Youngkin targeted public safety, health care and education, including bonuses and salary increases for teachers and state employees, while projecting a balanced budget over the six-year forecast window. He acknowledged at the time that his successor and the Democratic-led legislature would ultimately reshape the plan.

Senate Democrats argued Sunday that his outgoing proposal left “significant structural deficiencies,” particularly by not planning for new federal cost shifts under HR1, including potential state matching requirements for food assistance.

Lucas said the Senate amendments were built around affordability and long-term fiscal balance.

“It’s the entire mantra of this session,” she said. “The committee has delivered a budget focused on affordability, while still maintaining structural balance.”

Data centers and tax cuts

A central change in the Senate plan would allow the data center sales and use tax exemption to end on Jan. 1, 2027. Originally projected to cost $1.54 million annually, the exemption now forgoes roughly $1.6 billion per year in revenue, according to Senate Democrats.

“In the most recent fiscal year alone, they benefited from more than $33.2 billion dollars in tax-free computer equipment purchases,” Lucas said. “We’re asking data centers to pay their fair share in sales tax to help deliver our core services — education, transportation, and social services.”

By ending the exemption, the Senate would direct nearly $300 million to transportation across all modes and make one-time investments in water infrastructure, Lucas said, while avoiding additional tolls or fees.

The Senate plan also includes a one-time tax rebate to be issued around Oct. 15 and increases the standard deduction by $450 for individuals and $900 for married filers.

“By exempting more income from taxation, Virginians get immediate relief in their paychecks. That’s affordability,” Lucas said.

Health care and federal uncertainty

Health and Human Resources Subcommittee Chair Creigh Deeds, D-Charlottesville, said the Senate confronted rising Medicaid costs projected at $3.2 billion in general fund spending through fiscal 2028.

Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program cover 1.8 million Virginians, he said. The subcommittee adopted $591.2 million in savings strategies and set aside a $90 million reserve while restoring the prenatal care program.

With enhanced federal Affordable Care Act tax credits having expired Dec. 31, Deeds warned that up to 100,000 Virginians could lose coverage. The Senate includes $200 million in the first year to subsidize premiums.

The House proposal similarly emphasizes backfilling federal reductions.

Health and Human Resources Subcommittee Chair Rodney Willett, D-Henrico, said the House recommends $79.1 million to reduce premium spikes, $45 million to restore federal reductions for core public health services and more than $211 million to cover new state cost shares for SNAP benefits.

“We feel it is a prudent and responsible decision to act now,” Willett said, to ensure uninterrupted access to food benefits.

The House plan also includes $11.1 million for a sickle cell disease package and funding to improve maternal and infant health programs.

House Appropriations Committee Chair Luke Torian, D-Prince William, said his chamber’s budget “backfills those holes, not out of politics, but out of prudence.”

“This is a balanced budget,” Torian said. “It is built on conservative revenue assumptions, maintains healthy reserves, and prepares us for continued uncertainty ahead.”

Education and housing

On education, the Senate proposes 3% raises each year for teachers and state employees, along with $50 million for a childcare pilot to match employer contributions.

Education Subcommittee Chair Mamie Locke, D-Hampton, said the Senate plan adds more than $627 million in general fund support over the biennium, including increased funding for at-risk students, special education and school construction through a 1% local option sales tax for renovation projects, pending local referendums.

In higher education, the Senate recommends $159.4 million in additional funding, including $65 million for need-based financial aid and $32.5 million for workforce credential grants.

The House budget also invests heavily in K-12 and early childhood education.

Elementary and Secondary Education Subcommittee Chair Delores McQuinn, D-Richmond, said it includes $400 million in one-time flexible funding for school divisions and $160 million in additional special education support, along with $160 million for early childhood education to clear childcare waitlists for families earning below 85% of the state median income.

On housing, the Senate wants to invest $50 million in its housing trust fund and $13 million for eviction prevention, while the House directs $187.5 million to the Virginia Housing Trust Fund, establishes a $25 million revolving loan fund for mixed-income housing and provides $17 million for eviction prevention.

Balancing new revenues

Anne Oman, staff director for the House Appropriations Committee, said signed by Gov. Abigail Spanberger on Friday increased current-year general fund resources by $3.1 billion, leaving $2.3 billion to carry into the new biennium.

The proposed budget assumes modest 3% to 3.5% annual revenue growth, though year-to-date collections are running at 6.9%.

Adjustments eliminate Youngkin’s proposed tax cuts, capture nearly $80 million from a business-ready site acquisition fund and recognize potential revenue from skill games legislation, projected at about $176 million annually if enacted.

After accounting for $1.8 billion in additional spending, the House plan leaves an unappropriated balance of $15.2 million at the end of the biennium, Oman said.

Despite bipartisan moments, some Republicans voiced caution.

“I want to say thank you to you,” Senate Minority Leader Ryan McDougle, R-Hanover, told Lucas. “This has been a challenging process, and I appreciate the fact that you and I can have candid conversations as we’ve worked through this.”

He added: “Today, I am going to vote to abstain, because of some of the significant physical impacts that I’m concerned about in Virginia as we continue to discuss. This budget has a significant amount of additional revenues up and above the proposed budget, and I think we need to have a serious conversation about where those revenues come from, how they impact Virginians, and continue to discuss them as we go forward.”

Source

“This one will trickle down over time, and I’m very worried about the contamination as it goes,” Sen. Richard Stuart, R-King George, said in an interview Friday.

The DC Water system owns the pipe that broke in Montgomery County, Maryland on Jan. 19 and leaked over 243 million gallons of sewage into the waterway. The agency estimates it will take about six weeks for a temporary fix on the pipe – and nine months for a permanent solution.

Meanwhile, the Virginia Department of Health has issued a recreational advisory for 72.5 miles of the Virginia coast along the river, urging people to avoid touching the water and to be cautious when preparing seafood harvested from the river.

VDH has not issued any warnings for drinking water and Maryland has issued a shellfish closure only for the Port Tobacco River region down to the Harry W. Nice Bridge.

After one of his constituents asked VDH about potential contamination, Stuart said he was concerned to learn that the agency was not testing the water given the magnitude of the spill.

“VDH will not conduct water sampling. The agency does not operate a freshwater bacterial monitoring program for recreational waters, and the Potomac River falls under Maryland’s jurisdiction for water quality oversight,” VDH’s Feb. 14 letter read.

Stuart then sent his own to State Health Commissioner Dr. B. Cameron Webb.

“Virginians who fish, crab, boat, and recreate on the Potomac deserve proactive protection and transparency, not a declaration that no testing will occur because another state holds primary authority,” Stuart wrote to Webb on Wednesday. “Furthermore, there are miles of creeks and tributaries branching off the Potomac River that are unquestionably Virginia waters, directly impacting the health of our marine resources and shoreline communities that I represent.”

By Friday, Stuart said, the state’s top environmental agency had taken preliminary steps to test state waters.

“I have since learned that (Department of Environmental Quality) is engaged, and they are doing sampling in various places. They were sampling on the edge,” Stuart said Friday. “I asked them if they would please go out into the channel and do various water columns to determine if it’s on the top.”

The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality said in a statement that on Tuesday, the agency collected 25 surface water samples across the recreational advisory area from above the sewer line break to Potomac Creek in Stafford County. The results of those samples are pending.

The agency also said VDH staff “conducted a routine seawater sampling run for shellfish growing areas from Colonial Beach to the 301 (Harry Nice) Bridge, collecting 36 water samples in total. Based on their laboratory analyses, there were no elevated fecal coliform bacteria concentrations, with the vast majority of the samples at or below the detection limit for the test.”

VDH replied to Stuart on Wednesday in a letter obtained by The Mercury.

“We will continue sharing information, including sample results, between VDH, DEQ, Alex Renew, DC Water, MDE and VDEM. VDH staff are also maintaining communication with seafood industry stakeholders and watermen to provide timely, accurate information,” Lance Gregory, Director of VDH’s Office of Environmental Health Services, wrote.

Gregory also said that the agency, in partnership with the Marine Advisory Board, “developed a mapping resource that illustrates the spill’s geographic scope relative to other productive waterways in the Commonwealth. This tool supports affected watermen in communicating clearly about the limited proximity of the incident to other harvesting areas and helps preserve confidence in Virginia seafood.”

The state’s chief executive also weighed in on the disaster on Friday and said the state’s drinking water is safe.

“I’m encouraged that EPA and FEMA have begun coordinating with DC Water to respond to the sewage spill in the Potomac,” Gov. Abigail Spanberger said in a statement. “Amid the response, our state agencies are conducting water quality testing and monitoring the status of repairs. Our focus is on Virginians’ health and safety. Virginians should know that the spill is not impacting our drinking water.”

Members of Virginia’s congressional delegation, along with Maryland officials, about their concerns over the health and environmental impacts of the spill. Still, Stuart is pushing for the state to do more.

“Maryland owns the Potomac, but a lot of people in Virginia make their (livelihood) on it, and we eat a lot of the seafood that comes out of it. It’s a very productive river, despite how badly we treated it over the years,” Stuart said.

Conservation group Potomac Riverkeepers Network agrees with the senator that this extreme of a situation calls for different approaches on how to handle it.

“The historic sewage spill and the ongoing risk of intermittent overflows demands a departure from the status quo,” said David Flores, the Vice President of the Potomac Riverkeepers Network. “Virginians deserve more, not less, water quality monitoring and long-term assessments to protect their safety and the Commonwealth’s natural resources. This responsibility should not be deferred to another state.”

Source

The lawsuit, filed in Tazewell County Circuit Court, seeks an emergency order to stop state and local election officials from moving forward with the planned vote while the case is litigated.

The action follows by the Supreme Court of Virginia allowing that the vote can proceed while the court reviews an appeal of the lower court’s ruling from last month that the underlying redistricting amendment as unlawful.

In an expedited move, the state’s high court said its order “has no effect on the referendum scheduled for April 21, 2026,” clearing the way for voters to decide the fate of the proposal even as legal challenges continue.

The plaintiffs — the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee, U.S. Rep. Ben Cline, R-Botetourt, and U.S. Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Salem, — argue that Democrats’ effort to fast-track the amendment violates the Virginia Constitution and amounts to an unlawful partisan power grab.

In the , the plaintiffs asked the court to issue a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against Virginia’s commissioner of elections, members of the State Board of Elections and several Tazewell County election officials.

They contend the court should intervene immediately to “preserve the status quo” and prevent what they describe as “irreparable harm” before a hearing can be held. They have requested a hearing and relief before March 2.

A temporary restraining order would act as a short-term pause on the referendum. A preliminary injunction, if granted, would extend that pause while the broader lawsuit proceeds.

The legal challenge marks the latest turn in a over a mid-decade redistricting amendment advanced by Democratic lawmakers earlier this year.

RNC Chairman Joe Gruters said in a statement that Democrats are attempting to “ram through” an illegal redistricting scheme that the Tazewell County court has already called “a blatant abuse” of power.

“Despite nearly half of Virginians supporting President Trump, Abigail Spanberger and Democrats are working to silence voters and lock in permanent political control,” Gruters said.

“They’re ignoring the state Constitution, misleading voters, and rushing a sham election. The RNC is stepping in to stop this power grab and defend Virginia voters who would be effectively disenfranchised by Democrats.”

NRCC Chairman Richard Hudson echoed that argument, saying Democrats are “ignoring their own Constitution and trying to rig the system” in their favor.

“This is a reckless power grab designed to rush a sham process, mislead voters with deceptive ballot language, and lock in one-party control before Virginians have a fair say,” Hudson said.

“The NRCC is proud to fund this legal fight and work alongside the RNC to stop the scheme and defend honest representation for every Virginian.”

At issue is the proposed that — if approved by voters — would allow a mid-decade overhaul of Virginia’s current congressional by the state legislature. Republicans argue the amendment process is procedurally flawed and constitutionally defective.

Under the Virginia Constitution, amendments must be approved by the General Assembly and then submitted to voters no sooner than 90 days after final passage. Republicans say the amendment received final passage Jan. 16, but Democrats scheduled early voting to begin March 6 — less than 90 days later — in violation of that requirement.

The lawsuit also challenges the ballot language approved by Democratic lawmakers, which states that the amendment would “restore fairness.”

Republicans argue that characterization is misleading, contending the amendment would replace Virginia’s current nonpartisan redistricting framework with a system that would “unduly favor” Democrats.

In addition, the complaint asserts that the amendment improperly combines multiple unrelated provisions, violating the Virginia Constitution’s single-subject rule, which requires proposed amendments to address only one subject.

Alongside California, Virginia has become one of Democrats’ best opportunities to gain U.S. House seats in the upcoming midterms through redistricting. Under the current map, Democrats hold a narrow 6-5 edge in Virginia’s congressional delegation. The proposed map would boost that advantage to 10-1.

President Donald Trump received 46% of the vote in Virginia in 2024, Republicans note, but they contend the new map would reduce GOP representation to roughly 9% of the delegation.

Democrats reject those characterizations and say the referendum is proceeding lawfully.

House Speaker Don Scott, D-Portsmouth, accused Republicans of trying to derail the vote after failing in earlier court efforts.

“Republicans are terrified of the ballot box,” Scott said in a statement. “The Supreme Court of Virginia has already requested a briefing and approved the referendum going forward as planned. This is yet another attempt to judge-shop a complaint to a friendly venue after the Supreme Court refused their earlier efforts. Voters will decide this referendum.”

Republicans have also pointed to remarks made by Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger during the 2025 campaign, , “I have no plans to redistrict Virginia.” They argue the current push undercuts that pledge.

Democrats have maintained that the amendment process is consistent with constitutional requirements and that voters, not courts, should decide whether to adopt the new map.

The emergency motion filed this week focuses narrowly on halting the referendum before ballots are printed and early voting begins. The plaintiffs argue that once the election machinery is set in motion, the alleged constitutional violations cannot be undone.

If the Tazewell County court grants a temporary restraining order, election officials would be barred from proceeding with steps necessary to hold the April 21 vote until further hearings are held.

If the court denies the request, preparations for the referendum would continue as scheduled.

The case now sets up a potential clash between circuit court proceedings and actions already underway at the state Supreme Court, which has allowed the referendum to move forward while briefing continues.

A hearing on the injunction has been set for Thursday afternoon.

Source