A state judge on Jan. 27 halted an effort to redraw Virginia’s congressional map to benefit Democrats in time for the November midterm elections.

Although redistricting generally happens every 10 years after the U.S. Census issues its population count, the unusual midterm redistricting push now underway across the country started after President Donald Trump last year urged Texas state lawmakers to redraw their state’s congressional map to benefit Republicans. Texas did so, and Democrats in California responded by redrawing their state’s congressional map to favor Democrats.

Legislatures in Maryland, a Democrat-led state, and Missouri, a Republican-led state, are also attempting to redraw their respective maps for partisan advantage. Legislatures in other states are considering redrawing their maps.

Democratic state lawmakers in Virginia have said their redistricting plan, which was introduced a week before last year’s statewide elections, would give Democrats 10 of the state’s 11 congressional seats. Currently, Democrats occupy six of Virginia’s seats in the U.S. House of Representatives; Republicans occupy the other five.

Tazewell County Circuit Judge Jack Hurley Jr. said in a new ruling that the Democrat-controlled Virginia General Assembly did not follow the correct procedures when approving a proposed amendment to the Virginia constitution. The amendment would permit a last-minute redrawing of congressional districts in the state.

Democratic lawmakers in Richmond approved a measure moving forward the redistricting plan in late October 2025 during a special legislative session that was called to deal with the state budget.

Earlier this month, they approved a measure that would put the proposed constitutional amendment before state voters before the 2026 midterm elections take place.

Hurley ruled that the proposed constitutional amendment was invalid because the General Assembly failed to approve it before voting got underway in the 2025 general election and failed to publish the amendment three months before an election. State law mandates that a proposed constitutional amendment must first be passed before an election, and then a second time after an election.

The judge also said that the procedural resolution calling the special session, at which the proposed constitutional amendment was passed, stated that “no bill, joint bills, joint resolutions, or resolutions affecting the rules of procedure or schedule of business of the General Assembly” may be added to the special session’s agenda “except with unanimous consent.”

Unanimous consent was not achieved, because Republicans voted against adding the proposed constitutional amendment to the special session’s agenda, he added.

Hurley also held that the General Assembly engaged in a “blatant abuse of power” by not following other procedural rules.

Hurley granted a motion permanently blocking the redistricting plan that was filed by Republican lawmakers and a member of the state’s redistricting commission.

Subject to any appeals to higher courts in Virginia, this means that the General Assembly may not redraw the state’s congressional map before the November midterms, although lawmakers may do so afterward, provided that they comply with applicable rules.

Virginia State Sen. Bill Stanley, a Republican, hailed the new ruling.

The court decision is “a huge legal victory” that stops Democrats’ “illegal attempt to ram through their illegal gerrymandering change to the Virginia Constitution,” Stanley said in a social media post.

Gerrymandering refers to the manipulation of electoral district boundaries to benefit a particular party or constituency. The U.S. Supreme Court has previously ruled that race-based gerrymandering violates the U.S. Constitution, but redrawing boundaries to boost partisan fortunes passes constitutional muster.

Don Scott, the Democratic speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates, said Hurley’s ruling will be appealed.

“Nothing that happened today will dissuade us from continuing to move forward and put this matter directly to the voters,” Scott said in a joint statement with other Democrats.

Election law attorney J. Christian Adams told The Epoch Times that Hurley’s ruling was “terrific news.”

“It’s a relief to see a court focused on the law and not looking for a way to dismiss a case based on standing,” said Adams, who is president of the nonpartisan Public Interest Legal Foundation.

Standing is the right of someone to sue in court. The parties must show a strong enough connection to the claim to justify participating in a lawsuit.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

This article by Matthew Vadum appeared Jan. 27, 2026, in The Epoch Times. It was updated Jan. 28, 2026.

Photo: Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D). Official portrait from 2023 when she was a congresswoman. (Public domain)