At least for now, Old Dominion’s highest court is allowing Democrats to forge ahead with a hyper-partisan redistricting map, effectively stripping Republicans of four congressional seats. The Virginia Supreme Court agreed Friday to hear a challenge brought by Republicans against a proposed referendum on allowing the Democrat-controlled legislature to redistrict, but refused to issue an injunction barring the move. While the court described the case as being “of such imperative public importance as … to require a prompt decision,” the deadline for briefs in the case was scheduled for April 23, two days after the Democrats’ referendum, scheduled for April 21.

Chief Judge Jack Hurley of Virginia’s Tazewell Circuit Court sided with Republicans late last month, agreeing that Democrats in the General Assembly had violated their own legislative rules in order to pass the redistricting bill, and also failed to adhere to state laws on posting public notices related to referendums. Currently, Republicans hold five of Virginia’s 11 congressional seats; the new maps are expected to create 10 Democratic-held districts and leave only one in Republicans’ hands. When Democrats appealed the case, however, Virginia’s appellate court forwarded the appeal directly to the state Supreme Court, citing the unprecedented and time-sensitive nature of the case.

Virginia’s Supreme Court took up the case, but denied Republicans’ request to pause the redistricting effort while the court hears arguments. “Given the limited scope of the injunctive relief issued in the circuit court’s order,” the high court wrote, “the denial of the motions to stay has no effect on the referendum scheduled for April 21, 2026, and nothing in this order shall prevent the parties from raising the underlying arguments and issues as this matter goes forward.”

In comments to The Washington Stand, FRC Action Director Matt Carpenter said, “This isn’t great news for Virginia Republicans hoping to stop the Democrats’ new hyper-partisan congressional map, likely flipping four Republican-held congressional districts blue.” He explained, “The silver lining for Virginia Republicans is that the Virginia Supreme Court panel said the case can continue, and the court could overturn the referendum if it rules the vote shouldn’t have happened.” Carpenter added, “Still, politically it seems unlikely that the court would take that extreme step — especially since it not only denied the stay but let the referendum take place even while it is being challenged as improperly rushed to the ballot.”

Since the Virginia Supreme Court will not hear arguments until after the referendum vote, any decision in favor of the Republicans would involve quashing a measure approved directly by voters. The Federalist’s Breccan F. Thies anticipated that the case could have three potential outcomes: “The referendum fails and the case would likely not be heard; the referendum is approved and the court agrees with Democrats, allowing the gerrymander; the referendum is approved and the court agrees with Republicans, throwing it out. The last scenario is unlikely, since the court would be seen as nullifying a vote.”

According to a Christopher Newport University survey published last month, nearly two thirds (63%) of Virginians prefer the state’s bipartisan redistricting commission over partisan efforts to draw new congressional maps mid-decade, but a slim majority (51%) endorse the Democrats’ constitutional redistricting amendment as a means of countering Republican efforts to redistrict in other states.

The Virginia high court also permitted Democratic Attorney General Jay Jones to intervene in the case, effectively allowing Jones to formally join the litigation as a party in the case.