Virginia Democrats are scrambling as a legal challenge threatens to undo their new congressional map, which critics say hands Democrats a 10-1 edge and could be tossed by the state Supreme Court over several procedural and statutory flaws.

Rachael Bade, co-host of The Huddle, and former Democratic operative Dan Turrentine have been talking about how the Old Dominion’s redistricting could collapse. The map in question is built to favor Democrats 10-1, and the state Supreme Court declined to dismiss a lawsuit that could force a redo. That looming decision has pushed panic into high gear inside the party.

Republican observers and others note the legal warnings were reportedly raised repeatedly but ignored by the lawmakers who pushed the plan. If the court finds merit in even one of the procedural claims, the map could be invalidated and the political fallout would be severe. Leaders at both the state and national level are already bracing for a messy, public scramble over blame.

AND THE KNIVES ARE OUT FOR SOME BIG NAMES. Per Dan’s reporting, Governor ABIGAIL SPANBERGER’s staff is quietly sniping at state Senate majority leader SCOTT SUROVELL and state Senate kingmaker LOUISE LUCAS — two lawmakers who pushed back hardest on the legal warnings last fall.

[…]

If this effort goes down, those quotes won’t age well. “People are lining up behind the scenes to go public, I think, very quickly if this does not go through,” Dan foreshadowed.

BUT HERE’S THE THING — Pointing fingers won’t let Spanberger off the hook, which we discussed at length on the show. Yes, she may have privately raised concerns about the effort early on. But she’s the one in the ads. She’s the face of this thing. As our other co-host SEAN SPICER put it bluntly: “She ate the political cookie on this one.”

The other name in the crosshairs if this goes down? House Minority Leader HAKEEM JEFFRIES. Dan is already hearing from some Virginia Dems who say the Democratic leader pushed too hard despite legal concerns. (Though, let’s be fair to Jeffries — he would have been slammed by the party if he hadn’t leaned in, and his team would likely wear such criticism as a badge of honor.)

TO BE SURE, Democrats could still win this court battle. But the behind-the-scenes freakout shows the level of concern. Indeed, the legal vulnerabilities are real — and they are stacked. Sean, a Virginia native, has been harping on about the apparent procedural problems for months:

• That Democrats failed to provide a required 90-day notice before the election.
• That Democrats used “misleading” ballot language when they framed the question as one of “fairness.”
• That they didn’t follow the statute requiring an “intervening election” of the House of Delegates between two votes approving a constitutional amendment.
• And that the special session was invalidly called and used to advance the effort.

Those charges cut to the core of how the map was advanced, and they make a cleanup job politically costly. If the court rules against the map, the party will have to explain who authorized the shortcuts and why standard procedures were bypassed. That will fuel calls for accountability from both opponents and uneasy Democrats who were sidelined as the plan moved forward.

Former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli had more:

Turrentine gave Virginia Democrats less than a 50 percent chance of their map being certified, a sober assessment that reflects how stacked the legal questions are. When the math and the paperwork are both shaky, even well-funded political strategies can collapse under judicial scrutiny. The odds quoted aren’t just about politics; they’re about whether the process met the legal standard.

The internal finger-pointing the blockquote captured is already happening behind closed doors, and it will be public if the court invalidates the plan. Names like Abigail Spanberger, Scott Surovell, Louise Lucas, and Hakeem Jeffries are now associated with a risky gamble that could blow up. For conservatives watching, this is an example of what happens when politics trumps procedure.

At stake is more than a single map — it’s a test of whether political actors will be held to procedural rules or get to rewrite them when it suits them. A ruling against the map would force a reset and likely invite tougher scrutiny of how constitutional changes and election questions are handled. That would be a win for transparency and for the rule of law.

Whatever the court decides, the fight has already exposed deep fractures inside the Democratic coalition in Virginia. Public squabbles and private sniping rarely help a party recover quickly, and the short-term scramble for cover will shape messaging and races in the months to come. Republicans will be paying attention to how this shakeout reshapes the ground in Virginia.