Virginia Supreme Court Strikes Down Redistricting Referendum, Fueling National Debate Over Fair Maps and Political Power

Let’s talk about the big news that came down on Friday. Look, it’s the thing we’ve been telling you. If you’ve been listening to this program, if you’ve been listening to the old show, that’s how far back this goes, the old radio show that we were telling you this and it finally came to fruition. This is why it pays to listen to this program, because we’re not bound to either side because we’re not on anybody’s team. We can look you right in the eye and tell you on both sides exactly what’s going on. You get information that you’re not going to get anywhere else in any media outlet. And I had a conversation with somebody over the weekend, they were talking about, in fact, we were talking about the conservative media’s refusal to hold Diego Morales accountable. And they said, why won’t some of these high profile talk show hosts say the stuff about this guy? Why don’t they say the stuff that you say? And I said, because even the people who are independent, there’s still a part of them that wants to be accepted, that wants to be liked, that wants to get invited to things, that wants to be a speaker at a Lincoln Day dinner. Even the kind of people that share our political views, there’s still part of most of them that crave some level of acceptance or a lot of level of acceptance from the political class, and as long as the political class defends Diego, they’re not going to risk that. Look, everybody knows what Diego is, certainly inside the Central Indiana political class bubble. Everybody knows what he is. It’s not in dispute. It’s not like up for debate. But that’s the difference of our program. We don’t care. When we tell you something, it’s because we believe it, because we’ve done the research. We are only beholden to you. It is truly, I would say independent journalism, but I’m not really a journalist per se. It’s independent media, independent in the sense of, look, I’m a Republican. I’m not giving up that Republican in good standing status, but I am independent in the terms of my thought and having the ability to look at all the sides and tell you what’s going on.

Virginia Supreme Court Ruling Reignites National Redistricting Debate

And so in the case of Virginia, the popular battle cry from people in the state of Indiana who wanted redistricting was, but Virginia, like every time you would bring up the thing about the maps and the fairness of the maps, and trying to create maps that represent the people of Indiana, because really, let’s face it, we are moving to a point where our congressional maps, our state House maps, our state Senate maps, they’re not about representing the people, which is what they should be. They’re about representing a political party and whatever political party’s in charge. That’s how we’re going to draw the maps. And so one of the nice things that’s come out of this is you have seen the Republicans in Indiana be forced to admit they don’t give a damn about fairness. They don’t care at all about good representation. They don’t care about equitable representation, not in terms of who wins the elections, but in terms of drawing maps that fit communities of interest, that keep people together with like-minded interests, that have points of commonality where your representative would, heaven forbid, actually represent you. I mean, that’s the word, right? Represent. It’s not supposed to be represent a political party. It’s supposed to be we represent people of like-minded interest, and that should be the goal of the district. It’s why on the other side of the aisle, I have said the map in Louisiana was so ridiculous. You have a district that snakes across the entire state. Why? Because under previous Supreme Courts, they had felt they had to draw congressional districts that guaranteed black representation, or that black people were going to be the decider on who was the representative. That’s super racist and wrong, the same way as the Republicans here in Indiana carving up districts to ensure Republican representation rather than good representation is wrong.

Critics Say Both Parties Use Redistricting to Protect Political Power

Look, I think if we’re being totally honest with ourselves, as much as I don’t like the guy, as much as I don’t agree with just about anything he stands for, if you look at the city of Indianapolis now, Andre Carson represents the city of Indianapolis. I think if you’re being perfectly honest with yourself, Andre Carson represents the city of Indianapolis. These are the same group of people that have for three times elected Joe Hogsett to be their mayor. I don’t think there’s any debate or discussion here about what the city of Indianapolis is. And the Republicans have drawn these congressional districts to protect their other representatives, mainly Victoria Spartz, and they have made Indianapolis sort of its own congressional district. Now, they’ve drawn out any hints of the suburbs. They’ve moved parts of the district, including Indianapolis, down. I think Andre Carson represents Indianapolis. I think he’s a good reflection of what the city has become. Our maps are really good. The Indiana congressional delegation maps are really good. If you look at Indiana, we’re about a 60% Republican state. Seven of the nine seats are Republican. I think you could actually make it six out of nine be Republican and be a more reflective representation of our state. But in terms of do these maps reflect our state, I think they do. I think if you look at the House and Senate right now, our state House and state Senate maps, Indiana probably is a supermajority Republican state. It’s reflected in the maps. Now, is it 40 Senate seats Republican? I don’t know. But the point is when people kept coming back as, but Virginia, but Virginia, but Virginia, I’m listening to this going, first of all, I don’t live in Virginia. I don’t pay taxes in Virginia. I live in Indiana. I care about my representation being fair. And again, if we’re being honest with ourselves, what have the Republicans done where you would be super excited about scaling a map to give you more Jefferson Shreves, more Erin Houchins, more Jim Bairds? If you’re being honest with yourself, you say nothing. You’d say nothing. And so when the but Virginia people were screaming during the redistricting battle here in Indiana, I kept saying all the way back into the last fall, this is going to get overturned at the Virginia Supreme Court. Virginia can do the Virginia Democrats can do this exercise however they want. It’s going to get overturned at the Supreme Court. The law in the Constitution of Virginia was ironclad, and it was patently obvious the Democrats were brazenly breaking their Supreme Court Constitution. And on Friday, the Virginia Supreme Court confirmed what I have been saying for almost six months now, which is indeed, the Virginia Democrats acted in an openly unconstitutional manner, and they struck down the map. They struck down the referendum vote. They struck down what would be the new maps. And Virginia will proceed with the status quo. So now for all the people who were really, really mean to me for the past six months shouting but Virginia, but Virginia, oh, Rob Kendall’s a wimp, he wants to have Indiana play by the rules, but Virginia doesn’t have to, and all the names, and I’m a this and I’m a that and a rhino and a uniparty, can I get my apology now? Can I get my apology now? We were right. Virginia Democrats didn’t follow the rules, the obvious, the patently obvious rules of their Constitution. And you could tell this, not that you needed further affirmation, but you could tell this in February when there were arguments in front of the Virginia Supreme Court. There was arguments about stopping the referendum altogether. And basically what the court said at the time, if you were paying attention, and of course this is the problem, right? So many people in politics are so just emotional about everything. They don’t read, they don’t understand, they don’t take the time to learn what’s going on in these other states. It was obvious in the line of questioning that came from the Supreme Court in Virginia that they were going to throw that referendum out, because basically what they said in February was, okay, we’re going to let this referendum go forward, but we are not, wink wink, in any way guaranteeing that it will stand once it goes forward. If it passes, we’re not in any way, you guys can do this if you want. We’re going to have our say when it’s all said and done. And the Democrat governor and the Democrat legislature in Virginia made the choice to proceed. They should have known it was going to go down. Now, let’s talk a little bit about how Virginia actually works, because then we’re going to get to the ridiculousness of the Democrats. See how we do it here. We started with the ridiculousness of the Republicans, then we’re going to get to the ridiculousness of the Democrats because everyone is awful. Everyone is awful.

Virginia Democrats Accused of Violating State Constitution During Referendum Process

So under Virginia’s constitution, the General Assembly has to pass a constitutional amendment not just once, but twice, once before a regularly scheduled legislative session and once after. That’s the key, right? It’s ironclad. There’s no debate. There’s no discussion. You have to pass a constitutional amendment once before a regularly scheduled session and once after. In the case of redistricting, the Democrats voted on redistricting the first time last fall while an election was actually going on. There was not the before and the after to send a question to the voters. It was just patently obvious that this was going to go down. Democrats wanted to ignore that. Democrats wanted to believe, hey, the Supreme Court is going to under pressure give in to us. But writing for the majority, Justice D. Arthur Kelsey wrote that the legislature submitted the proposed constitutional amendment to voters in a, quote, unprecedented manner. Quote, this violation irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void. The Democrats, by proposing this amendment and voting on it the first time while early voting last fall was underway, because remember, Virginia has off year elections. Their governor’s election was in 25. They’re not even years. Them and New Jersey, I think, are there maybe one other state, a couple other states, but most states are on the even years. Virginia is on the odd years. They presented the referendum vote while early voting was going on, had already started. Knocks it out. It’s obvious. There was no doubt about any of this. Now let’s get to where the Democrats are ridiculous, because immediately after the ruling came down, the Democrats in Virginia said, we’re taking this to the Supreme Court, like the U.S. Supreme Court. I’m sure Clarence Thomas is going to love that. I’m sure Clarence Thomas is like, please, yes, bring this to the U.S. Supreme Court. But immediately the Democrats also start with the MAGA stole the election stuff. And I’m reading this going, you people are just the most pathetic people imaginable. Your constitution was crystal clear that you couldn’t do this. The judges in the hearings earlier this year, before the referendum even went forward, basically told you this is going to go down if you do this. And let’s talk about how Virginia Supreme Court justices are selected. This is a very weird way to do it, but it’s actually probably the most quote unquote bipartisan way imaginable. Virginia Supreme Court justices, there are seven, there’s only five in the state of Indiana. Virginia Supreme Court justices, there are seven, are selected by the legislature, by the legislature, which oftentimes is bipartisan. You know, Republican House, Democrat Senate, Republican Senate, Democrat House. Virginia is a swing state. They have Republican governors, they have Democrat governors, and they serve for 12 years. It’s not a lifetime appointment. It’s for 12 years. So throughout the course of the past 12 years, you have had bipartisan legislatures select these judges, bipartisan. And yet because they didn’t rule the way the Democrats wanted in a patently brazen, blatantly obvious violation of their Constitution, that everybody who is remotely fair paying attention said, this is going down. Whatever anybody does, don’t do it on Virginia. This is going down. The hearing in February backed that up. But this is politics, right? The Virginia Democrats said we’re going to ram this illegal, unconstitutional thing forward anyway and dare the Supreme Court to strike it down. To the credit of the Virginia Supreme Court, they said, okay, we’ll do that. But the whole MAGA stole the election stuff from the Democrats is pathetically laughable. They didn’t steal anything. MAGA doesn’t control the Virginia Supreme Court. The Virginia Supreme Court just said, we can read, you broke the law. You can’t do this.

Fair Representation and Competitive Elections Remain Central to Redistricting Debate

Now look, a lot of these states are going to redistrict now based on the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that rigging congressional districts to favor black people is unconstitutional and racist. And that’s okay. I don’t have any issue with that if they want to do that, because the maps in Louisiana were brazenly unfair. You can’t have a district that snakes across the entire state. Every state, including Indiana, should have a vested interest in drawing maps that represent population, that represent communities of interest. And then the parties, and what a novel idea, run good candidates, fund them, and win on a battle of governance and ideas. I know, what a radical rhino idea that is, right? That the parties run good candidates in fair districts and win on ideas. Ideas about governance that’s for the people. Ideas about governing that benefits the collective. Ideas of governing that puts the special interests’ interests aside and actually pushes policies that help the taxpayers. This is why I’ve always been so against this, whether it’s California or Virginia or Indiana or Louisiana. We shouldn’t bail out bad governance by changing the maps to reward bad governance. We should reward good governance by electing people who run on ideas and follow through. We’re never going to get that as long as we just keep rigging these maps in favor of one political party. And thankfully, the Virginia Supreme Court said it’s not happening there.