The Virginia Supreme Court Chose Principle Over Politics: Katherine T. Bennett in RealClearPolicy
As America approaches her 250th anniversary in July, Virginia has given us a meaningful reminder of the disciplines of a constitutional republic.
In her latest piece for RealClearPolicy, Process and Procedures Task Force Director Katherine T. Bennett examined the recent Virginia Supreme Court decision striking down the heavily-politicized redistricting amendment.
The rules for governance are meant to be steady. They were designed to outlast any one campaign, any one governor, any one majority. In a 4–3 decision over a hotly contested redistricting amendment, the Supreme Court of Virginia proved that point.
The justices invalidated a change to the state constitution that would have opened the door to partisan gerrymandering. Though narrowly approved by Virginia voters, the politicians leading the efforts had not followed the constitutional process for amendments.
The case had all the modern trappings. A plan designed to tilt congressional maps 10–1 in favor of one party; a ballot question wrapped in language about “restoring fairness;” and a narrow, statewide “yes” vote.
Virginians were asked to approve a map that would give one suburban northern Virginia county control of five separate seats. These proposed districts appeared as tentacles into the southwest and central parts of the state, ensuring that Fairfax County controlled the fate of rural representation. The proposed map was not displayed in ads or in polling places.
While 51% voted “yes,” the court examined the Virginia Constitution, looked at what the General Assembly had done, and said, in effect, “No. That is not how it’s done.”