Democratic lawyer Marc Elias appears to believe that Democrats do not need to stop at simply sacking and packing the Virginia Supreme Court in response to the adverse ruling on the radical gerrymandering plan. Elias reminded Democrats that they could eliminate the entire Virginia government under the state constitution.

The demand for radical action was prompted by the Virginia justices, including one appointed by then-Democratic governor Mark Warner, who found the Democratic effort unconstitutional. It does not matter that leading Democrats, including Gov. Abigail Spanberger, also believed that the Democrats could be found in violation of the state constitution in pushing forward with the controversial effort to virtually extinguished Republican representation in the purple state.

The adverse decision has resulted in the same demands for radical institutional changes from some of the same voices pledging to pack the United States Supreme Court once they retake power, to guarantee they never lose it again.

Elias responded to the loss by invoking language from Article I of the Virginia Constitution itself:

“whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.”

That is his response to a well-reasoned decision of unconstitutionality of a redistricting plan. We can scrap the entire Virginia government.

It is another example of the “by any means necessary” culture of the left today. There is no institution or value that is sacred. This is why I recently wrote about the rise of “the new Jacobins” in my book Rage and the Republic, lawyers and law professors rationalizing the trashing of the Constitution and our institutions to achieve their political goals.

Elias has long been controversial for his tactics.

It was Elias who was the general counsel to the Clinton presidential campaign when it secretly funded the infamous Steele dossier and pushed the false Alfa Bank conspiracy. (His fellow Perkins Coie partner, Michael Sussmann, was later indicted but acquitted).

Clinton campaign officials denied any involvement in the Steele Dossier. When journalists discovered after the election that the Clinton campaign hid payments for the Steele dossier as “legal fees” among the $5.6 million paid to Perkins Coie, they were reportedly stonewalled. The campaign was ultimately sanctioned by the Federal Election Commission for the subterfuge.

New York Times reporter Ken Vogel said at the time that Elias denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier. When Vogel tried to report the story, he said, Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman later wrote that “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”

Elias’s group later unsuccessfully led efforts to challenge Democratic electoral losses.

In Maryland, Elias’s team supported another abusive gerrymandering scheme that a court found not only violated Maryland law but the state constitution’s equal protection, free speech and free elections clauses. The court found that the map “subverts the will of those governed.”

One media site accused Elias and his group of “making millions off gerrymandering efforts” while publicly denouncing Republican gerrymandering.

In 2024, Elias’s legal team was also accused of pushing “to bar third-party presidential candidates — including Cornel West — from swing state ballots where they might siphon votes from the Democratic nominee [Kamala Harris].”

Likewise, the New York Times reported that Elias’s firm’s work “on behalf of a Soros-funded PAC in Texas…was opposed by a left-leaning election watchdog as undermining laws intended to limit the influence of major donors.”

His group’s work for New York redistricting was ridiculed as not only ignoring the express will of the voters and also effectively negating the votes of Republican voters.

In 2024, the Chief Judge of the Western District of Wisconsin criticized the Elias Law Group for one of its challenges. Judge James Peterson (an Obama appointee) said that the argument “simply does not make any sense.”

Now, Elias is reminding Virginians that they can respond to an opposing court decision by eliminating some or all of the Virginia state government.

It is the logic of the Jacobin. As discussed in my book, the Framers sought to prevent democracy from becoming mobocracy by rejecting more direct democratic powers. They tried to temper the passions of democracy in moments like this.

There is nothing new about these voices, like that of Elias, in fueling radical impulses. They are the same voices and arguments that has long been heard in this country. We have long rejected them and this year will celebrate the 250th anniversary of our Independence. However, as Benjamin Franklin warned us and now Elias has reminded us, we must fight to keep this Republic.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”