Tag: virginia

Virginia Governor Spanberger Rages on X After Supreme Court Kills Democrat Gerrymander

Virginia Democratic Governor Abigail Spanberger erupted in anger on social media Friday after the Supreme Court refused to reinstate the state’s new congressional map that Democrats openly designed to flip up to four House seats in the 2026 midterms.

The high court’s one-sentence order left in place a 4-3 ruling from the Virginia Supreme Court that struck down the redistricting amendment on procedural grounds, meaning the state will use its existing 2021 congressional districts for the upcoming elections.

Spanberger took to X to lash out at both the state and federal courts, claiming they had “nullified an election” and the votes of more than three million Virginians.

The governor wrote in full:

The Supreme Court of the United States has now joined the Supreme Court of Virginia in choosing to nullify an election and the votes of more than three million Virginians.

These Virginians made their voices heard — casting their ballots in good faith to push back against a President who said he’s “entitled” to more seats in Congress before voters go to the polls.

As Governor, I will make sure voters know when and how to cast their votes this year. Because our votes are how we choose the representation we deserve.

Spanberger later shared a link on her personal campaign account directing supporters to donate to Democratic congressional candidates via ActBlue.

Keep reading

Lawsuits Challenging Spanberger’s Virginia ‘Assault Firearms’ Gun Grab Pour In

Multiple Second Amendment rights advocates are suing Virginia’s police superintendent after Gov. Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., signed into law legislation banning many semi-automatic firearms and standard-capacity magazines.

The new law, effective July 1, “criminalizes the purchase, sale, transfer, manufacture, and importation of a wide range of commonly owned semiautomatic handguns, shotguns, and rifles — including the AR-15, the most popular rifle in America,” said the National Rifle Association (NRA), one of the plaintiffs suing Virginia. It also “prohibits the purchase, barter, transfer, and importation” of any magazine that holds more than 15 rounds, the organization noted.

Democrat state Sen. Saddam Azlan Salim, a politician from Bangladesh who is a driving force behind efforts to strip constitutional rights away from Americans, authored the bill.

The NRA, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), and two NRA members filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the law; the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) and Gun Owners of America (GOA) filed a lawsuit in a Virginia county court; multiple firearm retailers, gun ranges, and other organizations filed a lawsuit in state court, and U.S. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon promised the Department of Justice would file one as well.

All lawsuits name Jeffrey S. Katz, superintendent of the Virginia State Police, as the defendant. The NRA lawsuit also names Goochland County Commonwealth Attorney John L. Lumpkins Jr. and Sheriff Steven Creasey, along with Prince William County Commonwealth Attorney Amy Ashworth and Sheriff Glendell Hill. Justin McDonald and Anthony Groeneveld, plaintiffs in the NRA suit, are residents of Goochland and Prince William, respectively, and are also members of the NRA, FPC, and SAF.

The NRA lawsuit appeals to U.S. Supreme Court precedent in both New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen and District of Columbia v. Heller (as applied to the states through McDonald v. City of Chicago) to argue the gun and magazine bans are unconstitutional. “By prohibiting Plaintiffs from acquiring common semiautomatic firearms and ammunition magazines,” the suit argues, “Virginia has prevented them from ‘keeping and bearing Arms’ within the meaning of the Amendment’s text. As a result, ‘[t]o justify its regulation, the government … must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.’”

Because ownership of the kinds of firearms and magazines banned by the new bill is widespread in Virginia, the new legislation necessarily cannot meet the standards set by historical practice, which, Justice Samuel Alito wrote, requires that the banned weapon be “both dangerous and unusual,” according to the lawsuit (emphasis original).

Keep reading

Worst Prosecutor In America Struggles To Explain Why Democrats Keep Protecting Illegal Alien Murderers

After being presented with piles of evidence showing his office systematically allows violent criminal illegal aliens back on the street, Steve Descano, the George Soros-backed Fairfax County, Virginia, Commonwealth’s Attorney, continued to claim his office does everything in its power to prosecute them properly.

Descano testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement in a hearing titled “Fairfax County, Virginia: The Dangerous Consequences of Sanctuary Policies,” alongside Fairfax County Sheriff Stacey Kincaid, former Republican Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, Cheryl Minter, the mother of a woman murdered by an illegal, and others.

In a heated exchange with Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, regarding Descano’s preferential treatment of illegals in sentencing — requiring that their immigration status be considered in a way that will protect them from deportation — Descano claimed the promise to shield illegals was merely an empty campaign promise.

“I didn’t realize people were so obtuse that they could not realize what the difference between a campaign statement and an actual office policy is,” Descano said. “We’re not protecting undocumented individuals, we prosecute people who commit crimes in Fairfax County regardless of their status.”

However, a since-deleted portion of Descano’s website, which had been up for six years until last week when he was asked to testify, stated, “Our office will take immigration consequences into account when making prosecuting decisions. … If two people commit the same crime, but only one’s punishment includes deportation, that’s a perversion of justice and not a reflection of the values of Fairfax County.”

Descano refused to answer how many times his office took immigration status into account when reducing the sentences of violent illegal aliens, but maintained that there was a difference between what his campaign website said and his office’s official policy.

Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, confronted Descano with his office’s official policy, which reads nearly the exact same way.

The guidelines for plea bargaining, charging decisions, and sentencing, signed by Descano himself, state, “Although not outcome determinative, prosecutors shall consider: (i) the collateral immigration consequences of the specific crime(s) the defendant is charged with, and (ii) the detrimental impact that deportation/removal has on the families and communities those removed or deported leave behind.”

That policy is in line with the county’s “public trust and confidentiality policy,” which allows illegal aliens in Fairfax to “access county benefits and services without fear that the information they share will be disclosed to federal immigration officials.”

Shielding illegal aliens is necessary, Descano argued, because 30 percent of residents of Fairfax County are immigrants, and their testimony is needed to obtain convictions. David Bier of the Cato Institute said that 20 percent of Fairfax’s residents are “here illegally or lives in a household of someone here illegally.”

Keep reading

Supreme Court Rejects Virginia Democrats’ Request to Intervene in Gerrymander Scheme

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) rejected a request from Virginia Democrats for the nation’s high court to intervene after the Virginia Supreme Court ruled to strike down a gerrymander scheme that would have redrawn the state’s congressional map in favor of Democrats.

In an order on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection had “no dissents,” NBC News reported.

Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) responded to the rejection by claiming that the Court had “joined the Supreme Court of Virginia in choosing to nullify an election.”

“The Supreme Court of the United States has now joined the Supreme Court of Virginia in choosing to nullify an election and the votes of more than three million Virginians,” Spanberger wrote in a post on X. “These Virginians made their voices heard — casting their ballots in good faith to push back against a President who said he’s ‘entitled’ to more seats in Congress before voters go to the polls.”

Keep reading

Fairfax County Democrat Prosecutor Exposed for Dropping Charges Against Illegal Alien Accused of Kidnapping 4-Year-Old Girl

Fairfax County, Virginia, Commonwealth Attorney Steve Descano (D) dropped charges against an illegal alien accused of kidnapping a four-year-old with the intent to sexually assault her after the prosecutor’s office attempted to offer him a sweetheart plea deal, Rep. Brian Knott (R-NC) revealed on Thursda

During a House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement hearing, Knott noted the case of Hyrum Baquedano Rodriguez, an illegal alien from Honduras, with multiple prior convictions for burglary and contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

In June 2023, Rodriguez was arrested in Fairfax County after allegedly breaking into an apartment and attempting to kidnap a sleeping four-year-old girl.

According to police, Rodriguez broke into the girl’s room while she was asleep. When the toddler’s mother heard her crying, she entered the room and alleges her daughter told her a man grabbed her and then ran away.

After his arrest, police said the illegal alien’s fingerprints were found in the girl’s bedroom.

By May 2025, Descano’s office sought a plea deal with Rodriguez in which a criminal court judge would be barred from sentencing him to more than two years in prison. The judge overseeing the case rejected the deal, suggesting that the sentence was far too lenient.

When the judge rejected the plea deal, Descano’s office dropped the charges against Rodriguez. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents were able to arrest the illegal alien before he reoffended.

“A disgusting, perverted individual preying on children — you dismissed the case,” Knott told Descano. “As the father of two young girls, one of whom is five, that is as shameful as anything I have seen. Quit defending the indefensible … it’s shameful. You’re a coward.”

Keep reading

This Has Gotta Stop: The View Puts Targets on VA Supreme Court’s Back With Fact-Free Meltdowns

Even if it wasn’t obvious before, it’s certainly been abundantly clear since the start of President Trump’s second term in office that Democrats have no qualms whatsoever about fanning the flames using outright lies and purposeful deception to the point it spurs their outrage mobs to take violent action in the name of  “democracy” and “social justice.”

We saw it, for instance, in the early to mid part of 2025, when Tesla dealerships and vehicle owners were being targeted by unhinged leftists who took it upon themselves to either try to run folks off the road for the crime of owning a Tesla or to shoot up and light showrooms on fire with incendiary devices because Elon Musk was a powerful ally of President Trump’s.

Notably, when prominent Democrats in Congress were asked to unequivocally condemn such actions, they refused. Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), for example, was asked at the time about the incidents and whether he condemned them. His response?  “I can’t talk about Tesla, but Elon Musk is a disaster for America, and America knows it,” Schumer stated, contributing to the anti-Musk hate.

Elected Democrats, of course, are not the only ones who deliberately stoke divisions along familiar lines that have the net effect of putting targets on the backs of conservatives, something that we unfortunately saw with the assassination of TPUSA co-founder Charlie Kirk. 

Their allies in the mainstream press and among the political/social commentariat also eagerly do the dirty work, a disgraceful tactic that was on full display during the Monday broadcast of The View, where, unsurprisingly, the co-hosts were livid over the Virginia Supreme Court’s (SCOVA) ruling on Friday that effectively nullified the proposed 10-1 D/R congressional map Democrats wanted to put in place before the 2026 midterms.

Keep reading

Mockery Ensues After Disgraced Virginia Attorney General Makes This EMBARRASSING Mistake While Begging the U.S. Supreme Court to Reinstitute the Democrats’ Rigged Map

The Democrats have not been sending their best people for a long time, but at least they can avoid the errors an elementary school child makes.

Not disgraced Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones, however.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, the Virginia Supreme Court overturned the Democrat Party’s rigged gerrymandering referendum last week in a 4-3 decision, ruling the entire sleazy process to sneak it onto the ballot was unconstitutional from the start.

This was the latest devastating blow to radical Democrats’ blatant attempt to rewrite Virginia’s congressional maps mid-decade and hand themselves a super-majority in the U.S. House by turning the state from a competitive 6-5 split into a laughably unfair 10 Democrats to 1 Republican slaughter.

Virginia voters previously approved the state legislature and Governor Abigail Spanberger’s wicked power grab in a narrow vote last month.

On Monday, Jones filed an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, begging them to restitute the rigged map. But when he filed the appeal, Jones was confused about which court he should send it to.

The appeal shows that he is addressing the Supreme Court of Virginia, not the U.S. Supreme Court. The Justices should throw this out based on the stupid error alone.

Keep reading

Angry Left plots to purge Virginia’s high court

After the Virginia Supreme Court rejected the results of the recent Democratic effort to effectively wipe out Republican representation in the state, Democratic pundits and activists have latched onto a proposal by Michigan State law professor Quinn Yeargain to gut the court by forcing the retirement of the current justices, appointing liberal activists, and then reversing the opinion. It is extremely telling that some are pushing the raw muscle play to retake power in Washington, particularly in light of the calls to pack the United States Supreme Court once the party is back in control.

Professor Yeargain declared on Substack that there is “a simple – and lawful – solution: Send the entire court into early retirement.” Under this plan, Virginia Democrats would adopt an absurdly low age for retirement in a gut-and-pack scheme: Yeargain suggested that they could set “the mandatory retirement of justices and judges after they reach a prescribed age, beyond which they shall not serve, regardless of the term to which elected or appointed.”

The current retirement age is 73.

Yeargain dismisses that number as “arbitrary” and says that the Democrats need only to “Make it 54 for Supreme Court justices – the age of the youngest justice, Stephen McCullough, who joined the majority opinion – and make it take effect immediately.”

Keep reading

Virginia Democrats Reveal a Radical Design

Virginia Democrats are doing an unwitting service to the whole country — by revealing just how hostile their party is to the most essential checks and balances.

Democrats violated the state’s constitution by pushing through a referendum to take four congressional seats away from Republicans.

But when Virginia’s supreme court threw out the illegal map, Democrats didn’t back down:

They started thinking of ways to get rid of every justice on the court, so they could pack it with new ones expressly picked to return a verdict more favorable to the party. 

If the Democrat-controlled Virginia legislature could impose a mandatory retirement age of 54 on the justices — who are all older than that — they could be removed and replaced by compliant partisans.

This wasn’t just a harebrained scheme by state Democrats; this was discussed on a call with the highest-ranking Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

As breathtaking as this power grab might be, it’s consistent with the thrust of the national party’s thinking about doing away with troublesome constitutional checks.

Democrats have been arguing for decades to weaken or eliminate protections built into the Constitution to prevent a self-interested faction or party — even one with a short-term electoral majority behind it — from seizing total power.

Virginia today is exactly what James Madison and other framers of the Constitution were afraid of:

A faction — the Democrats — is using its success in the most recent election to try to rewrite the rules for future elections and is prepared to intimidate or destroy any institution that stands in its way, including the state’s supreme court. 

Virginia is not a solid-blue state — just a year ago, it had a full slate of Republican statewide elected officers.

Its congressional delegation is split, six Democrats to five Republicans. 

It may presently be out of reach for Republicans in presidential elections, but its legislative races and contests for statewide offices are competitive — Republicans had a majority in the House of Delegates as recently as three years ago.

Indeed, Virginia is so politically balanced that Democrats try to put a moderate face on their party by picking the likes of Abigail Spanberger, Mark Warner and Tim Kaine for governor or U.S. senator, candidates who present themselves as centrists.

Yet once Spanberger was sworn in as governor this year, with Democratic majorities in the general assembly, the push was on to throw the state constitution aside and redraw the congressional map to give Democrats 10 seats to one for the GOP, and now the justices who stopped that gerrymander face the party’s wrath.

Virginia’s constitution doesn’t seem to allow removal of sitting justices by imposing a mandatory retirement age.

Keep reading

The Gerrymander Debacle In Virginia Leaves The Democratic Party With A Dangerous Agenda

“Eff around and find out”: That taunt from Hakeem Jeffries celebrating Virginia’s gerrymander did not age well.

On Friday, the House minority leader found out that Virginia’s Supreme Court was not quite as gleeful as he about Democrats’ attempt to virtually eliminate Republican representation in the purple state.

The court just cooked the party’s infamous lobster, a district over 100 miles long that was designed to help devour the GOP’s slender majority in the House of Representatives.

It also cooked the ambitions of Gov. Abigail Spanberger and the Democratic establishment, which tossed aside any pretense of principle in a raw political gambit.

The resulting faceplant is nothing short of legendary: Spanberger’s Democrats have succeeded in alienating half of the state.

For the governor, the court’s decision was particularly embarrassing.

Before assuming power, Spanberger denounced gerrymandering as “detrimental to our democracy and weakens the individual voices that form our electorates.”

She ran as a moderate, but Spanberger immediately turned sharply left once in office and called for the most extreme gerrymander in the nation.

The court found that effort was not only unconstitutional, but “wholly unprecedented in Virginia’s history.”

It characterized the state’s position as “a story of the tail wagging the dog that has no tail.”

While some of us had previously expressed skepticism over the rushed effort to circumvent the state constitution, the media almost exclusively relied on liberal experts who predicted the new districts would be upheld.

It was a calculated risk for Democrats, who have now burned their bridges with Virginia conservative and Republican voters.

As Winston Churchill said, “Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.”

Exhilarating and unforgettable: In a purple state where politicians often require crossover votes to prevail, the redistricting push was not just partisan but personal for voters.

National Democrats will soon “find out” whether Jeffries was right to prematurely celebrate a victory that seemed to secure his anticipated elevation to Speaker of the House.

The party is facing a potentially catastrophic reversal of fortune.

Keep reading