The General Assembly can roll marijuana & collective bargaining into the state budget which hasn’t passed yet. She doesn’t have broad line item veto powers and either has to accept the state budget as whole (with things she doesn’t like) or shut down the state government by vetoing it. If you care about these issues reach out to your delegate & senator and make it known this is a priority.
Something is up... Generally major legislation like this doesn't just sit on a governors desk with the deadline so close.
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/constitution/article2/section9/
An interesting loophole to possibly to exploit
I looked forward to voting for this in November. But the same 4 justices are likely to void our votes over “misleading” ballot language.
It’s a wild idea but why the hell not?
If the General Assembly chooses not to re-elect them, the court could go from a 4-3 conservative majority to a 5-2 liberal one.
He wrote the opinion overturning the voter approved referendum and his term expires January 2027.
A brief summary of the points he will argue on Monday based on the brief he submitted.
1. Intervening election: The Commonwealth argues Article XII was satisfied because it requires an amendment be passed, then approved by “the General Assembly elected at the first general election of members of the House of Delegates held after the first approval,” and the Virginia Constitution separately fixes that election on “the Tuesday after the first Monday in November.” On that reading, the Nov. 4 House election plainly intervened between approvals, and early voting does not alter the Constitution’s definition of when the election occurs.
2. Special session authority: The Commonwealth argues the first approval was valid because it occurred during a lawfully continuing special session that had not been adjourned sine die, and nothing in the Virginia Constitution limits constitutional amendments to regular sessions or imposes an expiration date on a special session. It further argues plaintiffs improperly try to turn internal legislative rules and questions about special-session scope into constitutional restrictions, even though those are matters committed to the General Assembly rather than the courts.
3. Notice/publication claims: The Commonwealth argues Article XII itself sets out the complete constitutional amendment process and does not make publication a condition of validity. It contends plaintiffs wrongly rely on Code § 30-13 to add an extra constitutional hurdle, even though that statute governs notice procedures and cannot alter Article XII’s requirements. The brief further argues alleged defects in publication, even if assumed, would not justify invalidating an amendment properly approved by the General Assembly.
4. Separation of powers / popular sovereignty: The Commonwealth argues the lower court violated separation-of-powers principles by adding constitutional requirements not found in Article XII, second-guessing internal legislative procedures, and effectively substituting judicial control for the amendment process the Constitution assigns to the General Assembly and ultimately the people. The brief frames Article XII as leaving courts to enforce the Constitution’s text, not invent additional hurdles, and warns that allowing judges to police election timing, legislative procedure, or ballot phrasing beyond the constitutional text would improperly transfer the amendment power from the political branches and voters to the judiciary.
Facebook is brain rot for boomers these days