Schapiro’s assumptions are often misplaced
Jeff Schapiro is nothing if not consistent. For any decision by a public body or official that he does not approve, his first assumption is that the decision must be corruptly motivated.
In his column, “Va. high court rolls over again — this time, on redistricting,” he suggests that a recent decision by the Virginia Supreme Court was made in return for an increase in the budget for the state judicial system. This would be shocking if true, and grounds for impeaching the entire court, but of course there is no evidence for it and no one is even alleging it. It is just another casual Schapiro smear.
Schapiro is a political writer, and another constant is his assumption that everything is political, including the work of the courts (unfortunately, the current attorney general shares this assumption).
The Supreme Court decision that he criticizes, in which the seven justices unanimously affirmed the finding of a circuit court judge that a challenge to legislative districts established by the General Assembly had not shown that the districts failed to meet the compactness standard in the Virginia Constitution, is completely reasonable and mainstream. Read it for yourself on the court’s website.
Yet for Schapiro, the court’s refusal to usurp the General Assembly’s constitutional function of determining district boundaries is “rolling over for the Republican legislature.”
JON JEWETT. ASHLAND.