According to the Constitution of Virginia, specifically
Article XII, Section 1, amending the document requires a multi-step "slow-walk" process designed to prevent hasty changes. [
1,
2]
The Procedure to Amend the Virginia Constitution
- First Legislative Vote: A majority of both the House of Delegates and the Senate must approve the proposed amendment.
- Intervening General Election: A general election for members of the House of Delegates must occur after the first vote but before the second. This gives voters an indirect opportunity to voice their views by electing representatives based on their stance on the proposal.
- Second Legislative Vote: The newly elected General Assembly must approve the exact same amendment language a second time during its first regular session.
- Public Referendum: If passed twice, the amendment is submitted to qualified voters in a statewide referendum. If a majority approves, it becomes part of the Constitution.
- Public Notice: The proposed amendment must be published for at least 90 days before the second legislative vote or the final referendum. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10]
How the Redistricting Amendment Failed This Procedure
On May 8, 2026, the
Supreme Court of Virginia ruled in
Scott v. McDougle that the Democratic-led legislature failed to follow this process: [
1,
2]
- Timing of the "Intervening Election": The General Assembly took its first vote on October 31, 2025—just four days before the November 4 "Election Day". However, the court ruled that an "election" includes the entire voting period, which had already begun via early voting on September 19.
- Deprived Voter Participation: By voting after 1.3 million Virginians (roughly 40% of the electorate) had already cast their ballots, the legislature deprived those voters of the chance to consider the amendment when choosing their delegates.
- Procedural Shortcut: Critics and the court noted the amendment was advanced during a budget-focused special session, further bypassing intended transparency and consistency safeguards. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
The court concluded this violation "incurably taints" the process, rendering the voter-approved referendum null and void regardless of the outcome at the polls. [
1,
2]