Virginia House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill

In 2014, voters including Golden Bethune-Hill sued Virginia, alleging that 12 state House districts were unconstitutional racial gerrymanders designed to pack Black voters. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia agreed that 11 districts were racially gerrymandered and ordered a redistricting. Virginia’s Attorney General declined to appeal, but the Virginia House of Delegates sought to defend the maps on its own. On June 17, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding 5-4 that the House of Delegates lacked Article III standing to bring the case. The Court ruled that the House, as a single legislative chamber, did not represent the state’s interests under Virginia law; that authority belonged exclusively to the Attorney General. The ruling upheld the lower court’s order requiring new, constitutional districts.

The U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, ruling 5-4 that the Virginia House of Delegates lacked standing. The lower court’s mandate to redraw the 11 racially gerrymandered districts was left in place.

Whether the Virginia House of Delegates, acting alone and without the state Attorney General, possesses standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution to appeal a federal district court ruling that struck down state legislative districts as racial gerrymanders.

The decision reinforced the primacy of state attorneys general in representing a state’s legal interests in federal court, limiting the ability of a single legislative chamber to independently defend districting maps. It ensured the completion of court-ordered redistricting in Virginia, which had immediate effects on the political composition of the House of Delegates and served as a procedural precedent in subsequent election law and gerrymandering litigation.