Newly inaugurated Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger has moved with striking speed to advance a progressive agenda in Virginia, discarding key Republican policies and confirming conservative fears that her moderate campaign persona was little more than political packaging.
According to Fox News, Spanbergers first hours in office have showcased the power of unified Democratic control in Richmond, with the party now holding the governors mansion and both chambers of the General Assembly, and Republicans are sounding the alarm that the commonwealth is being yanked sharply to the left.
Several GOP strategists and commentators argue that voters were sold a centrist image during the campaign, only to watch the new governor and her allies immediately embrace policies that mirror some of the most liberal jurisdictions in the country.
"Screw any and all of you who lied to low-information voters and sold Abigail Spanberger as some kind of moderate," complained Meghan McCain, the daughter of the late U.S. Sen. John McCain. "Shes been in office like 6 hours and is already trying to turn Virginia into Minneapolis."
"But but but I'm old enough to remember moderate candidate Spanberger who ran ads talking about crime, touting her law enforcement experience with her retired cop father," former NRCC executive director Rob Simms posted on X. "She's a fraud, has always been a fraud, will always be a fraud."
Fox News host Mark Levin took to X to say that Spanberger "lied through her teeth" on the campaign trail about her "moderate" positions and said she has been "moving at high speed to permanently radicalize and change the state." "Abigail Spanberger is no moderate. Sick stuff," James Laverty, the communications director for Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., said on X.
One of Spanbergers most consequential early acts was to fulfill a campaign promise to dismantle a key public-safety measure put in place by former Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin. Youngkin had required Virginia law enforcement agencies to cooperate with federal authorities in enforcing immigration laws, a policy long supported by conservatives who argue that coordination with federal immigration enforcement is essential to protecting communities from criminal illegal aliens.
On her first day, Spanberger signed 10 executive orders, including one that rescinded Youngkins directive and effectively signaled that state and local police would no longer be obligated to assist federal immigration enforcement efforts. "State and local law enforcement should not be required to divert their limited resources to enforce federal, civil immigration laws it is the responsibility of federal law enforcement," Spanberger said as she signed her Day 1 directive.
"Virginia state and local law enforcement officers must be able to focus on their core responsibilities : investigating crime and community policing." Critics counter that this move risks turning parts of Virginia into de facto sanctuary jurisdictions, where criminal aliens can more easily evade federal authorities and where local communities bear the cost of Washingtons failure to secure the border.
Spanbergers executive actions were quickly matched by an aggressive legislative push from Democrats in the General Assembly, who moved to unwind tough-on-crime policies that Republicans argue are essential to public safety. In a series of bills, Democrats proposed ending mandatory minimum sentences for a range of serious offenses, a move that conservatives warn will embolden criminals and further demoralize law enforcement officers already under pressure.
According to Jason Miyares, the outgoing Republican attorney general, those bills included a proposal to eliminate mandatory minimum sentencing for rape, manslaughter, assaulting a law enforcement officer, possession and distribution of child pornography, and other repeat violent felonies. Democrats also removed the mandatory minimum five-day sentence for first time DUI offenders in the state.
Law-and-order advocates see these changes as part of a broader left-wing experiment in criminal justice reform that has already produced disastrous results in cities like San Francisco, Chicago, and New York. They argue that loosening penalties for violent and sexual offenses sends precisely the wrong message at a time when many Americans are deeply concerned about rising crime and the erosion of public order.
Despite Virginia Democrats running on an affordability message in 2025, they were quick to raise taxes, according to critics. Among the bills they introduced was one that would raise the state's tax rate on residents' investments; another that would extend the retail sales tax to include several service industries previously not taxed, such as dry cleaning, landscaping, animal care, cosmetic services and gym memberships; one that would impose a tax on every delivery in Northern Virginia, ranging from Amazon to UPS; and an 11% tax on Virginia firearms.
"Virginia Democrats appear to be replicating the model of California in chasing away businesses and high-income households," lamented Jonathan Turley, Fox News Media contributor and Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Conservatives warn that layering new taxes on investment, everyday services, commerce, and even the exercise of Second Amendment rights will make Virginia less competitive, drive out job creators, and punish law-abiding gun owners under the guise of revenue generation.
Another controversial measure pushed by Democrats amid their new power is a bill aimed at requiring government contracts under $100,000 go to minority and women-owned businesses, leading some critics to argue the move is discriminatory against White men. The bill in question directs the executive branch in Virginia to set a target goal of picking business based on DEI criteria for at least 42% of its contracts, while also allocating a certain portion of its contracts under $100,000 "be set aside for award to certified" DEI businesses.
From a conservative standpoint, this kind of race- and gender-based contracting regime undermines the principle of equal treatment under the law and replaces merit with ideological quotas. Rather than focusing on cost, quality, and competence, the state would be pressured to award contracts based on identity categories, entrenching a divisive DEI bureaucracy at taxpayer expense.
The Democratic majority has also advanced a sweeping constitutional amendment on abortion that would lock expansive abortion rights into Virginias foundational legal document. The last step in a series of actions needed to take place to enshrine abortion rights in Virginia's state Constitution was also just passed by the Democratic Party-led state Senate.
If approved by voters in November, the constitutional amendment would permit abortion in the first and second trimesters, while letting Virginia regulate abortion in the third trimester for various reasons. The latest push has led pro-life critics to fear the new law would permit abortion up to birth and interfere with parental rights when it comes to minors.
"What you will hear is that all we're doing is solidifying Roe vs. Wade, and they're going to say the alternative would be a full ban on abortion in Virginia," said Victoria Cobb, Family Foundation of Virginia president. However, Cobb argued this is not the case.
"When a young girl considers an abortion, her parent would have to be involved, this amendment would essentially override that," she continued. "Same thing with late-term abortion, when we, right now, in Virginia, already have a situation where someone can get a late-term abortion, but, it has to be three doctors that sign off that in fact this is either the child is non-viable, or as they might say, There is a need,' we wouldn't say that exists for women's health that's how it can happen today.
But after this amendment passes, you'll have a situation where the only person making that decision about whether an abortion is allowed at the very latest moments, is the abortionist, the one who profits from the procedure." For conservatives, this is not merely a policy dispute but a profound moral and constitutional question about the value of unborn life and the rights of parents to be involved in life-altering decisions affecting their children.
Other notable mentions include a bill to end hand counting of ballots that can be read by a scanner, a bill to regulate "gas-powered leaf blowers" and other electric landscaping equipment, and a constitutional redistricting amendment that some critics say would put Democrats at a 10-1 advantage. The state's new attorney general, Democrat Jay Jones, also said his office would withdraw his Republican predecessor's opinion that illegal immigrants had a right to in-state tuition at the state's universities.
"Virginia's proposed redistricting amendment is a response to what we're seeing in other states that have taken extreme measures to undermine democratic norms," Spanberger said during remarks to a joint session of the Virginia General Assembly. Yet Republicans argue that the measure is less about protecting democracy and more about entrenching Democratic power for a generation, effectively sidelining conservative voters through partisan map-drawing cloaked in reformist language.
Meanwhile, shortly after being sworn in, Spanberger announced Virginia would rejoin the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative a move she said would lower costs, but that Republicans have argued will increase them. "For me, this is about cost savings. RGGI generated hundreds of millions of dollars for Virginia dollars that went directly to flood mitigation, energy efficiency programs, and lowering bills for families who need help most," Spanberger added during her address.
"Withdrawing from RGGI did not lower energy costs. In fact, the opposite happened it just took money out of Virginia's pocket. It is time to fix that mistake." Conservatives, however, view RGGI as a de facto carbon tax that will ultimately be passed on to consumers in the form of higher utility bills, burdening families and businesses while doing little to meaningfully affect global emissions.
Taken together, Spanbergers early actions and the Democratic legislatures agenda paint a clear picture of where Virginia is headed under unified liberal control: softer penalties for violent crime, higher taxes, expansive abortion protections, race- and gender-based contracting mandates, aggressive environmental regulation, and structural changes that could lock in Democratic dominance.
For many on the right, the speed and scope of these moves confirm their warnings that the moderate label was a political mirage, and that Virginia now stands at a crossroads between its recent record of pragmatic governance and a more ideological, California-style model of big government, social engineering, and progressive cultural priorities.
Login