A Virginia court ruled in favor of Democrats in a case concerning the Old Dominion’s congressional lines on Sunday, denying a last-minute Republican effort challenging Democrats’ redistricting referendum and the composition of the new House map passed by voters.
Richmond Circuit Court Judge Tracy Thorne-Begland denied a request by the Republican National Committee (RNC), Virginia GOP and others to block the results of a redistricting referendum held last week, when voters narrowly passed a set of congressional lines that gives Democrats four additional pickup opportunities in November.
The Virginia congressional delegation currently has a 6-5 Democratic edge, but the new map would give the party a 10-1 edge in November.
“This Court knows its role is clear. It is not to assess the wisdom of public policy nor to engage in policy making from the bench,” Thorne-Begland wrote. “Instead, it is to decide if those with whom we have entrusted power have exercised that power in conformance with their constitutional mandate. On this question, the Court’s answer is in the affirmative.”
The case has major implications for the November midterms as both parties have sought to redistrict mid-decade in hopes of winning the House majority. If Virginia’s map is upheld, it would offer Democrats more pickup opportunities for the fall midterms.
Republican plaintiffs, whose lawsuit was filed before the April referendum, had argued in their initial motion that the new House map passed by lawmakers, and later approved by voters, violated the state Constitution and was “adopted without legal authority when enacted.” Republicans also argue that the map passed was not compact.
“Unconstrainted by any traditional criteria, and intent on enacting an extreme partisan gerrymander [the new House map] rips the Commonwealth into pieces, tearing apart communities with actual shared interests in pursuit of a singular partisan objective,” the Republican lawsuit alleged.
Thorne-Begland wrote in his ruling on Sunday that Republicans were unlikely to prevail in several of their key arguments, though the judge did acknowledge that the new congressional lines were less compact than the ones the state previously had implemented.
“The 2026 maps are undoubtedly less compact than the ones they replace. They are certainly partisan gerrymanders. They displace both representatives and voters into new, oddly shaped districts,” the Richmond circuit court judge wrote.
“Instead, the Court simply concludes, when compared to the testimony of Dr. Palmer, who was not impeached in any meaningful way, that Dr. Palmer’s testimony and methodology is more credible,” Thorne-Begland said, referring to the intervenor’s expert witness, Boston University political scientist Maxwell Palmer.
“In short, reasonable and objective persons reached different conclusions on the effects of the 2026 maps. The issue of compactness is fairly debatable,” he added. Republicans are “unlikely to succeed on the merits of compactness.”
However, the Virginia Supreme Court will be the decisive adjudicator over issues around the referendum and new House map. The high court is hearing oral arguments on Monday over whether state lawmakers properly convened to tee up the redistricting referendum and whether the timing of the referendum should have happened this year.
Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
