The Real Losers in Virginia, SCOTUS Redistricting Decisions are “Progressives” and Trump
Irwin NowickIn all the drama on redistricting, people are overlooking what the courts have actually done: They made life miserable for extremists.
In terms of the Voting Rights Act, the point of it as envisioned by Martin Luther King, Jr. and President Lyndon B. Johnson was to enforce the 15th Amendment and to allow African Americans and others the freedom to register to vote and vote without intimidation or oppression.
As President Johnson stated, once African Americans had the right to vote and had their votes counted, every politician would be kissing their behind. Dr. King made a similar statement in 1957.
One of the underreported aspects of the Voting Rights Act is that it got far more votes in Congress than the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The reason was that no one wanted to piss off voters.
The VRA was designed to maximize voting participation, not guarantee a particular result. For example, in Tennessee, where African Americans could vote freely, their vote combined with Mountain Republicans made the state very competitive in state and federal elections.
While the VRA did not have an immediate impact in terms of elections, as African American voting grew starting around 1970 (and as noted by the Supreme Court, African American turnout often exceeded that of Whites), it did change politics in the South.
In 1970, 4 “New South Governors” were elected because of African American voters: Dale Bumpers [Arkansas], Reuben Askew [Florida], Jimmy Carter [Georgia], and John C. West [South Carolina]. West, along with the late Abraham Nowick, were the original patrons of Jim Clyburn.
The immediate impact of the 1970 election was that Strom Thurmond did a 180 on representing African Americans.
The VRA led to bi-racial coalitions in the South resulting in the so-called "90-10 strategy" of splitting the White vote and a Democrat getting 90% of the African American vote to win. To counter that, Republicans had to appeal to black voters to make it more like 80-20.
This strategy was used by Lamar Alexander in Tennessee, Linwood Holton in Virginia, and even Trent Lott in Mississippi. It is no accident that there are now 5 African American US senators, 4 of whom are from former slave states. This includes Tim Scott, who is an African American Republican from South Carolina.
African Americans have been elected to statewide office from former slave states. The likely next governor of Florida will be Byron Donalds, who is an African American Republican.
The Voting Rights Act, as enacted in 1965, did not mandate majority-minority districts. So, where did this idea originate? The answer is that it largely stems from the 1982 amendments to the VRA, which were designed to prevent the dilution of minority voting strength.
Section 2 of the VRA, as amended, mandates that no voting practice can result in a denial of rights, forcing states to draw districts where minority groups can elect candidates of their choice, particularly in areas with racially polarized voting.
This was pushed for by Bob Dole over the objections of Chief Justice John Roberts, who was then a Junior lawyer in the Reagan Administration.
In Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986), a unanimous Court found that:
"[T]he legacy of official discrimination ... acted in concert with the multimember districting scheme to impair the ability of cohesive groups of black voters to participate equally in the political process and to elect candidates of their choice."
The ruling resulted in the invalidation of districts in the North Carolina General Assembly and led to more single-member districts in state legislatures. However, Gingles did not require majority-minority districts.
After the 1988 election, as perhaps penance, the late Lee Atwater made it his mission to get more African Americans to vote Republican. As a “favor” to them, he called on the Justice Department to push for “majority-minority” districts.
As a result, in the 1992 redistricting, the number of majority-minority districts in Congress went up but the number of African American districts went way-way down. That redistricting, along with other factors, led to the 1994 rout of Democrats in the South.
The “packing” also went against what Dr. King and LBJ were trying to do.
It so happened that because you cannot racially gerrymander a state and because African American voter participation increased due to economic conditions nationwide, influence has grown.
Maryland, which is 28% African American, has an African American governor and an African American senator. They both ran as politicians who happened to be Black, but not Black Politicians.
What the Supreme Court did in Louisiana v. Callais was to declare racial gerrymandering a form of discrimination prohibited by the 15th Amendment. The effect of this was to go back to what Dr. King and LBJ envisioned in 1965.
One of the reasons Governor Brian Kemp does not want to redistrict in Georgia is precisely because of the massive growth in African American voting. It so happens that one of the state’s senators is African American.
An unpacking would cost the Republicans 2-3 US House seats.
What this all means is that instead of a district being, say, 50% African American it becomes 35% African American. What it also will likely lead to is more electoral competition and less race-based candidates.
In California terms, it means more Rod Wrights and Willard Murrays and less Maxine Waters or Corey Jacksons.
This phenomenon was alluded to by two sources: ESPN Sports Commentator Stephen A. Smith and Fox New Commentator and former Atwater protégé Karl Rove. Smith has argued that African Americans should vote Republican in one cycle just to show that they cannot be taken for granted or ostracized.
In terms of Rove, he argued that the Supreme Court’s decision empowers Black voters. Rove began the segment by explaining how bizarrely drawn congressional districts in Louisiana and Alabama had been created to comply with the VRA.
He stated:
“Well, first of all, most states have already set the elections, they’ve had their primaries, they’ve set the filing deadlines. Alabama has already said, ‘Look, we recognize that we’ve got to redo this, but we cannot do it this year. We’re going to do it in the future. We’re gonna do it before the next election.’ Louisiana’s thinking about trying to do this. We’ll see if they’re able to pull it off,” replied Rove. “The second thing I’d say is, is it increases the influence of Black voters. Because no longer are they grouped together under the notion of the only way that you can elect somebody who can represent Blacks is to have a majority of Blacks in that district. Now you’re going to have Blacks that are in a, you know, in a district that has community of interest and is more compact, in which both parties are gonna say we need to get inroads in that community, or dominate that community in order to elect one of our own to the U.S. Congress.”
In terms of Virginia, the question at the heart of the 4-3 decision handed down by the state Supreme Court invalidating a constitutional amendment that would have redrawn the state’s congressional map in Democrats’ favor is: Was the amendment properly proposed to Virginia voters?
In Virginia, as in many states, there are heightened thresholds to amend the State Constitution. In the Commonwealth, this means that a general election has to intervene between first and second passage of the measure by the legislature.
The only reason that this issue even arose is that former Gov. Glenn Youngkin called a special session on an unrelated matter in October 2025. During the session, the nominal leader of state Senate Democrats (who hold a bare majority), Sen. L. Louise Lucas (who is under investigation for cannabis related activities), decided to do a redistricting ploy. Never mind that in a wave election, Democrats could net 2-3 seats because of demographic changes.
In fact, most Republicans blamed this problem on Youngkin. He is now toxic with Republicans in general.
The key dispute here is over the meaning of the phrase “general election.” This isn’t a case of vaguely written text, per se, but rather text that probably was pretty straightforward when it was drafted (in 1971) but now is a bit vaguer since election practices have changed a lot in the last five decades.
The question became, what was “the election”? After voting started for the 2025 general election and more than 40% of Virginians voted, the redistricting amendment was first proposed and passed the State Legislature.
Then, after Gov. Abigail Spanberger – who was initially no fan of the process – was elected, the amendment was repassed again. It was then narrowly approved in a special election where $64 million was spent to pass it.
Shawn Griffiths
However, in looking at the election results, it only passed because of a huge 'Yes' vote in Northern Virginia, which was going to elect Democrats anyway. There was no guarantee of seat pickups, and the new lines made the life of incumbents miserable.
In the areas where Democrats looked to pick up seats it lost, this will likely infect the process for November. Members of the House of Delegates who pushed for this – starting with Dan Helmer – have nowhere to run.
Because of this stunt and because of her actions on certain firearms bills (one of which violates a court order and the Virginia State Police will not follow because of that court order), Spanberger finds her approval ratings in the toilet.
Democrats – who made major gains in the House of Delegates under lines approved by the state's redistricting commission – now find themselves at risk of major loses in the 2027 elections.
Spanberger (who cannot run for reelection in any event) is likely political toast unless she can do a reset to be relevant. What may save her and allow her to do a reset is Lucas going to federal prison.
About The Author
Irwin Nowick is a former senior consultant to the California State Senate. He worked behind the scenes as a legislative expert, reviewing bills, identifying drafting issues, and providing technical guidance before measures became law.
You Might Also Like
