A chilling headline from 1954 – “Incredible, unstoppable titan of terror!” – feels eerily relevant today, not for a movie monster, but for a political reality unfolding in Virginia. A new, sprawling distortion of voting districts has emerged, dubbed “The Lobster” for its immense, 100-mile-plus reach across the state’s landscape.
Virginia once stood as a beacon of fair representation, a state lauded for resisting the manipulation of district lines. It prided itself on balanced districts reflecting a closely divided electorate. That changed with the election of Governor Abigail Spanberger, who, despite promises against gerrymandering, swiftly proposed a radically skewed map.
The result is a creature of political engineering: the 7th Congressional District, and others like it, designed to dramatically shift the balance of power. What was once a relatively even playing field now threatens to become a 10-1 advantage for one party, effectively silencing the voices of a significant portion of the state.
One court initially challenged this plan, but another judge appeared to retreat from the fight. Richmond Circuit Court Judge Tracy Thorne-Begland seemingly echoed a sentiment from the creators of a more famous monster, suggesting that sometimes, acceptance of the problem is the only path forward.
The judge’s ruling is striking for what it *doesn’t* consider. Virginia law demands districts be “compact,” a clear contrast to the sprawling, crustacean-like shape of “The Lobster.” The state constitution calls for “contiguous and compact territory” with proportional representation, standards seemingly ignored in the analysis.
The court acknowledged the new districts are “undoubtedly less compact” and “certainly partisan gerrymanders,” yet dismissed concerns about compactness as “fairly debatable.” This acceptance of subjectivity renders the legal standards almost meaningless, reducing them to mere aspirations.
The concept of “compactness” has always been somewhat open to interpretation, described as “somewhat abstract” with no definitive test. However, this level of deference effectively strips the requirement of any real power, leaving it unable to meaningfully guide the drawing of district lines.
The Virginia gerrymandering effort is riddled with issues, from ambiguous language to questionable legislative procedures. Judge Thorne-Begland’s response mirrors the panicked flight of citizens in the face of an overwhelming force, a creature crushing everything in its path.
The fate of these districts now rests with the Virginia Supreme Court. Many who have fought against gerrymandering on both sides of the aisle hope the justices will uphold the principles of fair representation, a decision that will require significant courage.
The court faces a critical choice: to follow Judge Thorne-Begland’s lead and retreat, treating existing standards as irrelevant, or to act as a genuine check on legislative overreach. The decision will define their role in safeguarding the integrity of the state’s electoral process.
Ultimately, the wisdom of Japanese horror writers rings true: the true monsters aren’t the distortions themselves, but the individuals who create them, wielding power to manipulate the system for their own gain.
