文学城论坛
+A-

为什么说弗吉尼亚州的这次修宪过程是违宪的。

voiceofme 2026-05-08 20:49:37 ( reads)
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. [12]
 
The Procedure to Amend the Virginia Constitution
  1. First Legislative Vote: A majority of both the House of Delegates and the Senate must approve the proposed amendment.
  2. 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.
  3. Second Legislative Vote: The newly elected General Assembly must approve the exact same amendment language a second time during its first regular session.
  4. 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.
  5. Public Notice: The proposed amendment must be published for at least 90 days before the second legislative vote or the final referendum. [1234567810]
 
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: [12]
The court concluded this violation "incurably taints" the process, rendering the voter-approved referendum null and void regardless of the outcome at the polls. [12]

跟帖(15)

voiceofme

2026-05-08 20:51:25

民主党又把事情弄砸了。为什么不能早点开始

Uusequery

2026-05-08 21:08:45

主党计划上诉最高院,请问采用的依据是什么?

voiceofme

2026-05-08 21:13:24

最高法院怎么能裁决州宪法的修宪过程?但州高院不应该在允许投票后又裁决投票过程是违宪的。

voiceofme

2026-05-08 21:15:06

如此出尔反尔,要媲美川普了。

Uusequery

2026-05-08 21:19:39

那为何还上诉呢?

voiceofme

2026-05-08 21:21:04

你问我,我问谁啊

Uusequery

2026-05-08 21:22:09

讨论嘛,看有谁知道。

swart

2026-05-09 07:46:06

我想法院没有权利阻止投票,但有权判定内容是否生效.

voiceofme

2026-05-09 07:53:48

投票前,法院就知道投票内容了。

swart

2026-05-09 08:07:47

法院不是执法部门,你投不投票,不关他事儿,他只负责判断是否合法

天青水蓝

2026-05-09 08:08:34

可能五名法官中有一人态度转变。两次做裁决应该是两次投票的结果,而最后这次投票结果是2比3,如果第一次投票是三名法官支持,

天青水蓝

2026-05-09 08:10:13

两人反对,于是通过实行公投。第二次投票支持阵营中一人改变态度为反对,于是投票结果被否决。

天青水蓝

2026-05-09 09:10:00

如果法院认为就选区重划投票就违宪,是可以禁止投票的

swart

2026-05-09 09:16:35

Courts generally do NOT block a vote before it happens

天青水蓝

2026-05-09 11:18:38

明知公投违宪不制止,不是白白浪费纳税人的钱吗?