CryptoQueen retweetledi
Proud someone from my hometown called out the Democrats nonsense and hypocrisy here in Virginia:
On Redistricting
The most intelligent NextDoor comment evah. I hope Nathan in Herndon will forgive me for stealing this:
You’ve hit on the most legally radioactive argument currently in Richmond. The bottom line is that the Democratic state attorney’s claim—that early voting is merely an "accommodation" and not the real election—is a direct betrayal of the 45-day early voting window the current Democrat leadership fought so hard to implement. If a vote isn't a vote the moment it's legally cast, then we don't have 45 days of voting; we have 45 days of "taking a chance" with our constitutional rights. This just goes to show the Democrats don’t care about voting nor democracy, but simply winning, control, and power, like a King one could say?
It is a stunningly cynical legal pivot by the Democrats. For years, the movement has been to make early voting as robust and accessible as possible. Yet, when faced with a lawsuit from Judge Jack Hurley Jr.’s court that threatens their redistricting power grab, the administration’s lawyers are now telling 1.3 million Virginians that they voted "at their own risk."
The "Accommodation" Absurdity
The state’s attorney, Matthew Seligman, argued that the "election" officially only happens on one Tuesday in November (or in this case, April). This allowed the legislature to technically pass their redistricting amendment *while* people were already at the polls. By calling early voting a mere "accommodation," they are effectively creating two classes of voters:
Election Day Voters: Whose votes are "real" and protected.
Early Voters: Whose participation is a "risk-heavy contract" that can be undermined by legislative changes made while their ballots are sitting in a box.
Isn’t this ironic from the same party that claims voter-IS disenfranchises every one of a fair and equal voting opportunity?!
Their whole ‘theory’ is unconstitutional on its face. Under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and the "one person, one vote" principle, you cannot treat a ballot cast on October 1st differently than one cast on November 5th. If the rules of an election can be changed via constitutional amendment *after* the voting period has begun, the state is disenfranchising the million-plus people who already participated.
This is a fast-track ticket to the Federal Supreme Court. The idea that a voter "assumes the risk" of the government passing illegal procedural shortcuts is legally laughable. Judge Hurley has already signaled that he isn't buying it, ruling the entire referendum **void ab initio** (void from the beginning). You cannot have a "democracy" where the leadership pushes for more voting time but then argues in court that those specific votes don't technically count until they say so.
If the state Supreme Court doesn't strike this down, they are essentially telling every Virginian that early voting is a legal trap where your ballot can be rendered moot by whatever the General Assembly decides to pass while you’re walking back to your car. It’s hard to imagine a more direct way to destroy public trust in the very system they claim to be protecting.
English
