Three days after the Virginia Supreme Court struck down a voter-approved redistricting plan that Democrats hoped would flip as many as four U.S. House seats, reports emerged over the weekend that party leaders are discussing a breathtaking response: lowering the mandatory retirement age for state Supreme Court justices to a level that would remove every single member of the current bench.

The court ruled 4-3 on May 8 that the Democratic-led legislature violated procedural requirements when it placed a redistricting constitutional amendment on the ballot. Voters had narrowly approved the amendment on April 21, but the ruling rendered that result meaningless.

Now, rather than accept the defeat, Democrats are reportedly floating a plan to change the rules and try again with a friendlier court.

The Washington Examiner laid out the details of what is being discussed.

Democrats are considering a plan to lower the retirement age of Virginia Supreme Court justices in an attempt to remove all sitting judges and replace them with jurists more likely to allow the 10-1 redistricting referendum. The idea would set the judicial retirement age at 54, matching the age of the youngest justice who joined the majority opinion that struck down the referendum. Virginia currently has a mandatory retirement age of 73 for its judges, and the General Assembly appoints judges in the state.

Quinn Yeargain, a Michigan State law professor, floated the concept of sending the entire court into early retirement. Democrats control both chambers of the General Assembly, while Governor Abigail Spanberger would have to sign the bill. Yeargain suggested using the yearly budget, due June 30, as the vehicle. Virginia Democrats reportedly discussed the idea with Representative Hakeem Jeffries during a weekend strategy call. Representative Suhas Subramanyam said Democrats needed a strong stomach because Republicans would explore every option possible. Former Representative James Moran was more skeptical, reportedly calling the move a bridge too far.

Read that again carefully. Democrats are not talking about expanding the court, which would at least preserve the sitting justices. They are talking about engineering a mandatory retirement age so precise that it targets the youngest justice in the majority and sweeps every colleague off the bench alongside him.

The scheme depends on Governor Abigail Spanberger’s willingness to sign such a bill, and on the timing of Virginia’s June 30 budget deadline, which gives Democrats a legislative vehicle that could move quickly.

The court ruling is the reason this fight moved from redistricting into judicial power.

AP detailed the ruling and its national implications.

The Virginia Supreme Court struck down a voter-approved Democratic congressional redistricting plan, delivering a major setback to Democrats in the national fight over the House map. The court ruled 4-3 that the Democratic-led legislature violated procedural requirements when it placed the constitutional amendment on the ballot. Voters narrowly approved the amendment on April 21, but the ruling rendered the result meaningless and left the old congressional map in place unless another court intervenes.

Justice D. Arthur Kelsey wrote that the legislature submitted the amendment in an unprecedented manner and that the violation irreparably undermined the integrity of the referendum vote, rendering it null and void. Democrats had hoped to win as many as four additional U.S. House seats under the redrawn map as part of an effort to offset Republican redistricting elsewhere. Virginia Democrats later said they intended to file an emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court. President Trump celebrated the ruling on social media as a huge win for Republicans and America, while Democrats were left searching for another path before the midterms.

The stakes here are enormous. Those four potential House seats could determine which party controls the chamber after the 2026 midterms, and Democrats know it. That is precisely why the reported response has been so aggressive so quickly.

No bill has been formally introduced, and no vote has been taken. The political problem is that the idea reportedly reached a strategy call with the House Democratic leader, while a sitting Virginia legislator urged Democrats to have a strong stomach for the fight.

If Democrats proceed, they will be asking Americans to accept a principle that would terrify them if the shoe were on the other foot: that a state legislature can dissolve its own Supreme Court whenever the court issues a ruling the majority party dislikes. That is not court reform. It is the annihilation of judicial independence dressed up as a retirement policy.

President Trump called the original ruling a huge win. If Virginia Democrats actually try to purge the court that delivered it, the political fight that follows will make the redistricting battle look like a warm-up act.

Any thoughts?

This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.
 

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.