I’ve long maintained that politics is the pursuit of power, but it’s not everyday that politicians so clearly demand changing the rules of the game to suit their needs and democracy without rules isn’t democracy at all.
Less than two weeks ago, Democrats were giddy that Virginia voters narrowly supported a referendum for a supposedly temporary redistricting effort that would increase their number of seats in Congress by four in the name of “fairness.” Though such a measure had previously been banned by the state’s Constitution and there was reason to believe at the time that the procedure for amending the Constitution was not strictly followed, Democrats wasted no time congratulating each other in the name of democracy, which in this case meant disenfranchising their fellow citizens. “Congratulations, Virginia! Republicans are trying to tilt the midterm elections in their favor, but they haven’t done it yet. Thanks for showing us what it looks like to stand up for our democracy and fight back,” claimed none other than the nearly sainted former President Barack Obama, but in our system of government, the courts are the final arbiter of these matters and last Friday, the Supreme Court of the State of Virginia struck down the new map for the very same constitutional flaws that were known in advance, writing “This violation irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void.” They were referring to the rather incredible fact that over 1.3 million Virginians had already cast their votes while Democrats were attempting to change the very districts they had voted in and other procedural issues. Equally incredibly, the Republicans had filed in advance to block the measure from ever appearing on the referendum for these very same reasons, but Democrats argued that the court shouldn’t intervene until after the measure was approved, meaning they were well aware any celebration was woefully premature, like a baseball team congratulating itself for having a lead during the seventh inning stretch, and yet they proceeded to do a victory dance regardless.
Perhaps needless to say, this lasted until the State Supreme Court’s ruling last Friday. Afterwards, everything changed and those that had been congratulating themselves for standing up for democracy suddenly found the known in advance democratic process completely unacceptable. Though the Court itself was generally considered to be independent from politics, as even PBS put it “The state Supreme Court’s seven justices are appointed by the state legislature, which has toggled back and forth between Democratic, Republican and split control over recent years. Legal experts say the body doesn’t have a set ideological profile,” it was now partisan to the core. Representative Suzan DelBene, the chair of the Democratic Congressional Caucus, claimed the ruling amounted to authoritarianism because “four unelected judges decided to cast aside the will of the voters.” “This is a setback that sends a terrible message to Americans – the powerful and elite will do everything they can to silence you,” she wrote. “House Democrats will not let this happen. Our democracy was founded on the belief that the people have the final say. In November, they will, and they’ll power Democrats to the House majority.” Though no one mentioned that the supposedly non-powerful Democrats spent a whopping $60 million on the effort, not exactly an un-elite sum, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries echoed some of the same thoughts, writing in a statement, “Over three million Virginia citizens cast their votes in a free and fair election, yet the State Supreme Court has chosen to invalidate their voice, disenfranchise them and violate their due process rights. The decision to overturn an entire election is an unprecedented and undemocratic action that cannot stand…We are exploring all options to overturn this shocking decision. No matter what it takes, House Democrats will win in November so we can help rescue this nation from the extremism being unleashed by Donald Trump and Republicans. Our fight is not over. We are just getting started.” Later in the day, he called for other Democrat leaning states to pursue a gerrymander at all costs strategy, despite that many of them are already gerrymandered to the max or close enough for government work as they say. “The unprecedented decision by the Virginia Supreme Court reinforces the need to go all in in advance of the 2028 election It’s going to be incredibly important that states like New York, New Jersey, Washington, Colorado, Oregon, Maryland and Illinois are aggressive in moving forward to ensure that there’s a fair national map.”
Nor was the Virginia State Supreme Court overturning the redistricting effort the only setback Democrats suffered last week. Two days earlier, the United States Supreme Court ruled that districts created to serve racial interests were unconstitutional, limiting the impact of the 1960s Voting Rights Act and offering an opportunity for Republicans to carve out even more seats beginning in Louisiana, which was at the center of the case. To Democrats, however, following the agreed upon procedure for judicial review, as has been the process since Marbury v. Madison in 1803, and restoring colorblindness in the districting process was both undemocratic and racist at the same time. The chairman of the Democrat National Committee, Ken Martin, released a statement claiming “Today is a dark day for America — the Supreme Court just rolled back the clock on the Civil Rights Movement. The GOP-captured Supreme Court just effectively killed Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, a major step back in the fight for racial justice and fair representation. While today’s decision is a gut punch, make no mistake: Democrats will fight tooth and nail to ensure the voices of all Americans will be heard in November and in every election that follows.” Others claimed that MAGA had “rigged” the courts and were threatening to reinstate Jim Crow if not outright slavery, echoing the turning back the clock theme as talking points often do. Senator Cory “Spartacus” Booker claimed the ruling sent us “backwards in time.” “The Voting Rights Act was perhaps one of the most important acts in the history of our country in securing our democratic ideals: All are created equal, all are imbued with certain unalienable rights,” he told Kristen Welker on NBC’s Meet the Press, getting it precisely backwards given the ruling restored equality rather than supported inequality, of course. “And what [the Supreme Court has] done right now is sent us backwards in time, back to the 1870s and ’80s, where the South and southern legislators, through terrorism, intimidation and worse were able to stop African-Americans from having representation in Congress,” the New Jersey Democrat added.
Whatever you make of the decision, Democrats have vowed to fight back however possible, which means by considering some of the most undemocratic rules and moves imaginable in our system of government. As even the Democrat-friendly New York Times put it, “Democrats are struggling to respond to a major redistricting setback in Virginia, with some party leaders discussing an audacious and possibly far-fetched idea for trying to restore a congressional map voided by the court but showing little indication they have a clear plan.” At the time, they were considering a measure to remove the entire Supreme Court of Virginia and replace them with ideologues who would overturn the previous decision. “The conversation reflected the desperation and fury that have gripped the party after the state Supreme Court struck down a favorable map that had been ratified by voters. The most dramatic idea they discussed — which would involve an unusual gambit to replace the entire state Supreme Court, with a goal of reinstating their gerrymandered map — drew mixed reactions on the call, said the people, and it was not clear that it would even be viable, or palatable to Gov. Abigail Spanberger and Democrats in the Virginia General Assembly.” To make such a completely unprecedented move, “One key to the plan would be having Democrats in Richmond lower the mandatory retirement age for state Supreme Court justices, an idea that began circulating among state lawmakers and members of Congress after a column proposing a version of the idea was published on Friday night in The Downballot, a progressive newsletter…The first step in the process, as discussed on the delegation’s call, would be to invoke a January ruling by a circuit court judge in Tazewell County, Va., that said the 2026 constitutional amendment effort to redraw the maps was invalid because county officials did not post notice of it at courthouses and other public locations three months before a general election. Democrats would aim to use that ruling to seek to invalidate the earlier constitutional amendment that created the state’s independent redistricting commission by arguing that courthouses across the state did not post notice of it at the time. That would give the legislature the authority to enact a map of its choosing. Ensuring the plan proceeds would involve the General Assembly, which is controlled by Democrats, lowering the mandatory retirement age for Virginia’s Supreme Court from 75 to 54, the age of the youngest current justice, or less. Virginia judges are appointed by the General Assembly, where Democrats hold majorities in both chambers and could then fill vacancies on the court with sympathetic Democratic lawyers.”
While some Democrats, such as former Representative James P. Moran believe the move would be “just a bridge too far,” others believe Democrats should do whatever is necessary and that the desire to do so is not surprisingly, the Republicans’ fault. Representative Suhas Subramanyam, for example, claimed “Everyone has got to have a strong stomach right now; this is a complete disaster waiting to happen if people are timid. We have Republican states ignoring their constitutions and interrupting early voting and ignoring their Supreme Courts all together. We know based on that, Republicans would explore every single option possible to move this forward.” In addition, both recent decisions have caused yet another eruption of the longstanding progressive desire to protect our democracy by completely upending significant parts of it including packing the Supreme Court, eliminating the filibuster in the Senate, and granting statehood to Washington, DC and Puerto Rico. Essentially, anything is on the table now or in the future, except perhaps for altering their message and policies to appeal to a broader coalition of voters. Whatever they choose to do now and while I was writing this, it appears a senior leader in the Virginia Statehouse rejected the plan to essentially dissolve the Supreme Court, a few things should be clear. First, Democrat and broader progressive support for anything is predicated almost entirely on what it does to advance their power in the moment. Two weeks ago they were downright giddy at the prospect of redistricting when they felt it would net them more seats in Congress, but the second it became clear that they were likely to lose somewhere around 10 seats, the entire enterprise was immediately jettisoned and at least some called for the process to be banned. Ironically, considering that “fairness” was a driving force beyond the gerrymandered Virginia map that was ultimately rejected by the Court, “fairness” now meant that stopping the effort across the country. Some went so far as to attempt to apply the Virginia ruling to other states like Florida, claiming that if a map was rejected in one state for whatever reason, it must be rejected in another even when the situations were different. Of course, none of them stopped to consider that perhaps Virginia Democrats were at fault for rushing through a potentially unconstitutional referendum in the first place. The responsibility never rested on them, somehow, as is usually the case.
Second, and far more importantly, the Democrats simply cannot be taken seriously anytime they bleat about their unique role in preserving our democracy. While I and others have said for a while now that democracy means whatever they say it does and their vision of democracy doesn’t match what most people think, rarely do you see such a sudden, rather radical change in position in such a short period, a change driven entirely by their failure to get what they want. I’ve long maintained that politics is the pursuit of power, but it’s not everyday that politicians and their supporters so clearly demand changing the rules of the game to suit their needs and democracy without rules isn’t democracy at all.
Confessions of a Conservative Atheist 