Category: VA State News

  • Virginia joins initiative to create three-year bachelor’s degree model

    Virginia joins initiative to create three-year bachelor’s degree model

    Higher education leaders in Virginia and Ohio announced Thursday that they will join forces to create a model for three-year bachelor’s degrees, cutting the traditional timeframe of obtaining the credential by one year.

    The move reflects Virginia’s strategic plan to better align higher education with student and employer needs and increase affordability.

    Currently, the laws in Virginia and Ohio require at least 120 semester credit hours to earn a bachelor’s degree. By spring 2028, participating institutions are expected to propose two 90-credit degree programs.

    If successful, the 90-credit undergraduate degree would likely require legislative action, depending on how programs are structured.

    “Virginia’s higher education institutions continue to lead the way in innovation, demonstrating a statewide commitment to ensuring higher education delivers on its value proposition to students and families,” said Scott Fleming, the State Council on Higher Education for Virginia’s executive director, in a statement on Thursday.

    “Colleges and universities throughout the country are already offering three-year degrees, but there is no national model. This effort will create new pathways for students to pursue their life and career goals while ensuring a rigorous education experience,” he added.

    The effort emanates from a joint venture with Jobs for the Future, Arnold Ventures, Strada Education Foundation, the American Association of Colleges and Universities, and Ithaka S+R on the “Scaling College in 3” initiative.

    The three-year degree initiative builds on the work of higher-education researchers Robert Zemsky, Lori Carrell, and colleagues through the National Center for Inquiry & Improvement. The group argued in 2023 that college takes longer and costs more than it needs to, and many students are paying for credits that aren’t essential for a degree or a career.

    Higher education representatives from Virginia and Ohio will meet with national experts over the next year to discuss the program’s design.

    Potential legislative changes may be required in some states that have statutory or regulatory minimum credit-hour requirements.

    In Virginia, however, state officials indicate that the code does not prescribe credit-hour requirements for public institutions or exempt nonprofit private institutions, so any impact would likely depend on accreditation standards and institutional policies rather than state law.

    The General Assembly has already supported goals to improve affordability and encourage expedited degree completion.

  • Trump order limiting voting by mail halted by federal court

    Trump order limiting voting by mail halted by federal court

    A federal judge on Thursday blocked major portions of President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting voting by mail, finding he had exceeded his constitutional authority.

    The decision halts, at least until a nearly certain appeal is heard, efforts by the U.S. Postal Service to require states to submit the names of likely mail voters before it delivers ballots. It also stops the U.S. Department of Homeland Security from compiling lists of voting-age citizens in each state.

    U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an appointee of President Barack Obama in Massachusetts, is the first judge to block the March 31 executive order. State and local election officials have raised concerns that its requirements would inject chaos into preparations for the November midterm elections.

    Talwani ruled that Trump had asserted too much control over elections in several parts of the order as he directed federal officials to quickly take actions that he argues are needed to prevent noncitizen voting, which rarely occurs.

    “The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,” Talwani wrote.

    Order overpowered states

    The executive order directed Postmaster General David Steiner to put forward a rule requiring states, at least 90 days before a federal election, notify the Postal Service whether they intended to allow ballots to be sent through the mail. States would then have to submit to USPS a list of voters planning to vote by mail at least 60 days before the election.

    Talwani wrote that the Postal Service lacks any authorization by Congress to put forward binding regulations on mail-in voting. The Constitution, she wrote, “reserves the power to determine voter eligibility to the States alone.”

    The executive order also required the Department of Homeland Security, with help from the Social Security Administration, to compile a list of voting-age U.S. citizens living in each state and then provide that information to state officials at least 60 days before each federal election. The order does not tell states how to use the data.

    The list of citizens would be drawn from naturalization and Social Security records, according to the order. It would also include data from SAVE, a powerful computer program maintained by Homeland Security that verifies citizenship by checking names against information in federal databases.

    The executive order pointed to no relevant constitutional or legal authority supporting the compilation of the citizenship lists, Talwani wrote. Trump “lacks any authority to compile voter lists for each State,” she wrote.

    A day before the decision, Steiner told a U.S. Senate committee that a proposed Postal Service rule to implement the executive order would lead to non-delivery of ballots in states that don’t provide lists of anticipated mail voters — a position condemned by Democrats.

    “Today’s decision is a very significant victory for free and fair elections and a defeat for Donald Trump’s vile efforts to make it harder for people to vote,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, said in a statement.

    “Once again, the courts have reaffirmed that Trump’s efforts to subvert the election are patently unconstitutional.”

    White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement that the Trump administration remains confident the executive order will be implemented by the November election.

    “The entire Trump Administration will continue lawfully enacting the agenda President Trump was elected to enact – which includes the safety and security of American elections,” Jackson said.

    Latest setback

    Trump has suffered a series of setbacks in recent days in his efforts to influence the administration of state-run elections.

    A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that the Department of Justice wasn’t entitled to state voter rolls. Senators also continues to rebuff the president’s attempts to pressure them into passing the SAVE America Act, which would require voters to show documents proving their citizenship.

    Talwani’s decision came in a lawsuit brought by Democratic state attorneys general. It is the second major district court ruling over the executive order, after a judge in Washington, D.C., declined to stop the order because the Trump administration hadn’t taken enough action to implement it.

    Under Thursday’s decision, federal officials must notify their employees within a week that sweeping portions of the executive order are void.

    And on Monday, a judge blocked the use of SAVE to search for noncitizen voters.

  • More than abortion: What Va. patients and providers want you to know about reproductive health laws

    More than abortion: What Va. patients and providers want you to know about reproductive health laws

    Editor’s note: This story mentions pregnancy loss.

    Miscarriages were common for Albemarle County resident Casey Oakley during her in vitro fertilization process. Some embryo transfers weren’t successful and her body would expel the remnants, a process she had always handled safely at home, until an irregular delay.

    Her bloodwork had indicated her pregnancy hormones were not elevating properly, signaling an imminent miscarriage. But two weeks later nothing had happened.

    “(Doctors) didn’t know where the embryo had implanted in my body, so I was scheduled for an abortion, and I was told before my surgery that if they couldn’t find products of conception in my uterus, that they were going to be taking my tubes,” she said.

    Miscarriage management remains muddled 4 years after Dobbs

    The fallback option was meant to spare her the deadly infections that can arise when miscarriages fail to complete.

    “It wasn’t a question that they asked, it was more of a ‘this is what we have to do to make sure that you live,’” Oakley said.

    Doctors eventually discovered that her body had maintained a gestational sac but no fetal DNA.

    “My body had fought so hard for a pregnancy that would have no baby and then I was going into sepsis,” she said. “The abortion saved my life.”

    Her experience is foundational to her support for a pending constitutional amendment heading to Virginia voters statewide in November.

    If approved, it will permanently embed reproductive rights into Virginia’s constitution.

    The amendment would protect people’s access to contraception, IVF and abortion, four years after the Supreme Court overturned federal protections for abortion and more states have restricted access to the procedure and birth control.

    Virginia remains the least restrictive Southern state for reproductive healthcare in the era after Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the abortion protection case that justice struck down in 2022.

     

    State lawmakers weigh in

     

    Del. Cia Price, D-Newport News. (Ned Oliver/Virginia Mercury)

    Del. Cia Price, D-Newport News, was diagnosed with polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome at 16 years old. She recalled debilitating cramps that made it hard for her to focus in school and days she could not get out of bed.

    Formerly known as polycystic ovarian syndrome, PMOS is a full body disorder that affects people’s metabolism and reproductive organs. It can also cause infertility. Contraception has long been a standard treatment for the disorder to improve quality of life.

    Though Price doesn’t need contraception for family planning as she is in a same-sex relationship and does not want biological children, the treatment lessens her PMOS symptoms.

    She said her and others’ access to the medication could be at risk.

    After Dobbs, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the court revisit cases that have protected contraception, as well.

    Gov. Abigail Spanberger signed Price’s Right To Contraception Act into law this summer, after the bill was vetoed multiple times by former Gov. Glenn Youngkin.

    It will protect contraception access in the interim, though the pending reproductive rights amendment would shore matters up longterm.

    Price said she understands some of her constituents’ and legislative colleagues’ reasons for not supporting contraception or abortion — from religious objections to debates over life-at-conception. But she underscored the healthcare utility of each.

    “It’s just really disheartening for your quality of life to be at the intersection of an argument,” she said.

    “This is a difficult topic for a lot of people,” Sen. Emily Jordan, R-Suffolk, said during a floor speech earlier this year amid debate over the amendment.

    Jordan was among the Virginia Republicans who unsuccessfully sought to alter the amendment to reinforce existing state code outlining restrictions for minors and outlining care for infants when they are born.

    The amendment advanced due to Democrats’ majority in the Virginia statehouse. Now, it’s in voters’ hands.

    Price believes her contraception bill and the amendment “takes the conversation out of the political sphere and puts it in the medical sphere and the personal decision sphere.”

     

    The medical cost

     

    Dr. Kimi Chernoby, an emergency medicine doctor and lawyer, noted that emergency abortion care can happen at all stages of pregnancy if things go awry with the fetus or parent.

    She added that many first trimester abortions stem from miscarriages or ectopic pregnancies, and that restrictive state laws increase margins for death.

    “These laws are written by lawyers who have no medical training,” she said. “They actually prohibit a lot of care around miscarriages and ectopics, unless they fall within certain exceptions, and so that’s the care that is getting tangled up.”

    As chief operating officer for a nonprofit called FemInEM, Chernoby organizes training around the country for emergency physicians to handle reproductive health emergencies.

    The national patchwork of bans and restrictions with scant exceptions has complicated her and other physicians’ work, she said.

    Legal challenges to mifepristone further muddle matters, as the abortion pill is also critical for managing miscarriages to prevent sepsis. FemInEM has submitted amicus briefs as a key court case that could affect abortions and miscarriage care nationwide unfolds.

    Ahead of the fall referendum and pending court rulings, Oakley reflected on how an abortion allowed her to become a mother, surrogate and foster parent many times over.

    “I was able to further the lives of my children and four other little girls,” she said. “There will be many other children to come into our lives afterwards.”

  • Virginia joins challenge to Trump’s controversial IRS settlement

    Virginia joins challenge to Trump’s controversial IRS settlement

    Virginia Attorney Jay Jones joined a coalition of 22 Democratic attorneys general Wednesday urging a federal judge in Florida to closely examine a controversial settlement tied to President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, arguing the agreement raises serious constitutional and ethics concerns.

    The filing, submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, asks the court to scrutinize what the coalition describes as a potentially “collusive” settlement between Trump and the U.S. Department of Justice in the case known as Trump v. IRS.

    The attorneys general argue the agreement would grant broad protections to Trump, his family and business interests while creating a proposed $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization” fund that the president’s critics say could steer taxpayer money toward Trump allies and others claiming they were unfairly targeted by the government.

    The multi-state effort is led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta.

    “This proposed ‘settlement’ is yet another appalling example of Donald Trump’s belief that he is above the law, and that his presidency allows him to evade accountability for his illegal actions,” Jones said in a statement.

    “The people of the commonwealth are fed up with his schemes, and they are fed up with elected leaders who believe they are above the people they serve. This office will use every resource available to speak up for and act on behalf of Virginians, who deserve better than a president who only serves himself.”

    The filing comes as legal scholars, former federal judges and watchdog groups nationwide continue questioning both the settlement itself and the unusual circumstances surrounding the case.

    Trump, his sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump and the Trump Organization filed the lawsuit in January against the U.S. Treasury Department and IRS over the disclosure of Trump tax return information by a government contractor. The lawsuit sought billions in damages tied to the release of tax records later published by several news organizations.

    The suit drew immediate attention because Trump, as president, oversees the federal agencies he sued.

    U.S. District Court Judge Kathleen Williams had previously questioned whether the parties were genuinely adversarial and ordered a briefing on whether the court even had jurisdiction over the dispute. According to Wednesday’s filing, Trump voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit and entered into a settlement agreement with the U.S. Justice Department shortly before those issues were set to be argued.

    The coalition said that timing raises additional concerns.

    According to the attorneys general, the agreement appears to be “an attempted end-run around constitutional limits on Executive Branch authority.” The brief argues the settlement bears little connection to the legal merits of the original lawsuit and may exceed the Justice Department’s authority.

    The filing also argues the arrangement risks undermining public confidence in the courts by allowing a president to negotiate favorable legal protections with agencies under his own control.

    The dispute has sparked growing political and legal backlash since details of the settlement became public last month, with Democrats and some Republicans questioning whether taxpayer money could eventually benefit Jan. 6 defendants or political allies of the president.

    Former federal judges also urged the court to reopen the case, accusing the parties of potentially misleading the judiciary.

    The controversy escalated further after reports that the settlement included provisions shielding Trump, members of his family and related businesses from certain future tax investigations or audits.

    The Justice Department initially defended the proposal, describing the fund as a mechanism to address alleged government “weaponization.”

    “The machinery of government should never be weaponized against any American, and it is this Department’s intention to make right the wrongs that were previously done while ensuring this never happens again,” Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement last month.

    But the Trump administration has since faced growing political and legal pressure over the arrangement and has begun backing away from the proposed fund.

    Legal fights connected to the settlement, however, are continuing in federal court. A federal judge in Virginia last month blocked the proposed fund from moving forward.

    The Florida court is now considering whether to reopen Trump v. IRS under Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which allows courts to revisit judgments in cases involving alleged fraud, misconduct or deception.

    In this week’s filing, the coalition argued that state attorneys general have a particular interest in preserving public confidence in the legal system and guarding against abuses of executive authority.

    “The self-dealing and corrupt nature of this settlement agreement is antithetical to the responsibilities of attorneys general and the rule of law,” the coalition wrote.

    The Florida court has not yet ruled on whether the case will be reopened.

  • Va. legislature grants emergency funds to help close leaking, bankrupt landfill in Chesterfield

    Va. legislature grants emergency funds to help close leaking, bankrupt landfill in Chesterfield

    The Virginia General Assembly allocated $10.6 million in the two-year budget lawmakers passed this week for the Department of Environmental Quality to help contain toxic leachate spilling from the bankrupt Shoosmith Landfill in Chesterfield County.

    The emergency funds will be used “to prevent it from becoming a catastrophe”, according the Sen. Glen Sturtevant, R-Chesterfield.

    It represents a fraction of the $173 million needed to fully close down the landfill located off of Route 10 in Chester. The landfill, which has not taken in new trash since 2022 and whose owners filed for bankruptcy in 2025, reportedly generates about 50,000 gallons of leachate a day, a toxic wastewater made up of runoff from the garbage in the landfill.

    View of Shoosmith Landfill through trees surrounding a nearby neighborhood along Swift Creek. June 2026. (Photo by Shannon Heckt/Virginia Mercury)

    That toxic liquid has been spilling into stormwater collections and directly into Swift Creek in some cases, according to the James River Association.

    The creek flows into the Appomattox River and eventually into the James River at Hopewell – where drinking water is collected. Tom Dunlap, a riverkeeper with the James River Association, emphasized that if the leachate continues flowing into the environment it could lead to a major disaster, impacting clean drinking water and healthy streams for wildlife.

    “You have to treat that discharged waste fluid to protect the environment,” Dunlap said. “It can be laden with all sorts of things from heavy metals to PFAS chemicals, and on and on. To have that leachate wind up directly in the environment is one of the worst case scenarios that we could be experiencing.”

    The leachate is part of normal operations when managing a landfill, but must be treated before being discharged into wastewater treatment systems. In 2018, the county board of supervisors denied a request to expand the landfill by including a lined disposal cell in a nearby rock quarry.

    Supervisors said the disposal of the wastewater below the water table could pose serious health and safety risks for residents.

    The landfill has a history of improperly managing the leachate from the facility.

    Chesterfield County reported that between 2019 and 2023, elevated levels of ammonia were found in the wastewater treatment plant that were traced back to Shoosmith. The landfill wasn’t properly treating the leachate it was discharging into the municipal system, an investigation found, which is a violation of its permit and the Clean Water Act.

    This led the county to suspend Shoosmith’s permit to discharge the leachate into the county system; the liquid had to then be hauled offsite to be disposed of.

    When filing for bankruptcy, DEQ approved the surety bonds from the facility’s owners to the tune of $19 million. This money was earmarked for the bankruptcy trustee to oversee the continued clean up of the leachate. In a May 26 letter to DEQ, the senator asked what could be done to make sure taxpayers are not left holding the bag to close this private facility.

    Local residents in the surrounding neighborhoods have warned for years that the leachate has been getting into streams and odors have been permeating from the landfill.

    A group called Chesterfield Citizens for Responsible Government said that the $10.6 million in state funding is not enough to cover the environmental and infrastructure needs laid out in the bankruptcy filings and engineers budget report for the closure of the landfill.

    “These are not theoretical concerns. They are documented operational deficiencies at a landfill located adjacent to critical waterways. Immediate action is needed to protect public health, groundwater, and the environment,” the group said in a statement.

    The James River Association estimates that about $50 million is needed over the next two years to establish an on-site leachate and treatment facility to slow the spread into the local environment.

    “That engineering report cited elevated temperatures and all the knock-on effects of that which includes potential gases that are coming out of it, concerns with the stability of the landfill overall, identifying some of the more rapid-than-expected subsidence and collapses in the landfill,” among other concerns, Dunlap said.

    Sturtevant said that the $10 million is just the first step and that the state – alongside the EPA and local officials – are evaluating other revenue streams to help shut down the landfill and manage the leachate before it gets too dangerous.

    “This allows the federal, state and local folks the time to develop a plan to stop the leachate to prevent it from becoming a catastrophe, which is where it was headed, because they told us we’re gonna run out of money as soon as August,” Sturtevant said.

    The bipartisan delegation of lawmakers that represent the Chesterfield area have been engaging with DEQ and Secretary of Natural and Historic Resources David Bulova on how to protect residents in the interim.

    They are also considering how to claw back more funds from the company that abandoned the landfill when bankruptcy was filed.

    “It would appear that there were a lot of things that failed along the way, and we have these governmental rules and regulations and agencies in place for the purpose of not allowing that to happen,” Sturtevant said. “So it’s going to require some legislative changes to make sure that there’s not an opportunity for this kind of thing to happen again.”

  • After criticism, Virginia proposes two-year delay in raising school standards

    After criticism, Virginia proposes two-year delay in raising school standards

    The Virginia Board of Education may delay the full implementation of the state’s plan to raise academic benchmarks for reading and math by two years, rather than gradually increasing them over a four-year period starting this year as scheduled.

    The department briefed board members on the proposed delay at their work session on Wednesday at J. Sergeant Reynolds Community College in Henrico County, following a state study’s finding that the new K-12 accountability system, which includes the cut scores, could be refined.

    Virginia will raise cut scores for its Standards of Learning assessments to boost student proficiency, a process that was slated to begin this school year. This initiative, led by former Gov. Glenn Youngkin, followed findings of declining reading and math scores among students in grades 3 through 8, a trend that began during the pandemic.

    But critics are urging a slower rollout, saying a quicker shift could increase teacher burnout, lower graduation rates, and worsen inequitable access to education. Several members of the board said at Wednesday’s meeting that they wanted to keep to the original timeline.

    Higher SOL cut scores coming, but not this year, Virginia board says

    Board member Amber Northern, an appointee of former Gov. Glenn Youngkin, said Virginia has received national praise for moving toward higher standards and accountability. She is concerned the proposal jeopardizes the board’s earlier work.

    “Regardless of whether it’s a Republican or a Democrat in office … Virginia’s is for high standards and they’re going to work together with colleagues that are on the right, the left, the center .. to continue to do the right thing by kids on an aggressive, yet doable timeline,” said Northern.

    Ida McPherson and Bill Hansen, both Youngkin appointees to the board, opposed delaying implementation of the accountability system that includes the cut scores, citing concerns that staving off implementation would negatively impact student outcomes.

    Superintendent of Public Instruction Jenna Conway emphasized that higher proficiency cut scores would be in effect one year faster than the original plan.

    She also added that staff would meet the request of some members for a side-by-side comparison of the proposal to the board’s original plan, which some — including Fairfax County Public Schools, representing the largest groups of students in the commonwealth — took issue with.

    “These changes will have a significant and potentially detrimental impact on schools and students,” Fairfax said in a statement last fall about the original plan. “FCPS supports rigorous standards, but will continue to advocate for this work to be done in meaningful and measured ways.

    Arlington Parents for Education, a group advocating for high academic expectations, said in a statement it opposes this proposed delay.

    “This last-minute proposal to lower expectations would mislead parents and allow schools to keep delaying the improvements Virginia’s kids desperately need,” the group said in a statement. “Major changes to academic standards should be made through a transparent process focused on student outcomes – not rushed through at the eleventh hour.”

    According to a study conducted by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, if the plan passes, schools’ overall scores will drop by about 8.5 points, while proficiency scores will fall by about 21 points in reading and 17 points in math.

    The study stemmed from lawmakers directing the commission to examine the state’s K-12 accountability system, which was split into two parts: accreditation, which determines whether schools meet legal and regulatory requirements; and the School Performance and Support Framework (SPSF), which provides clear data on student and school performance.

    The board praised the report that included recommendations to refine the accountability system. Overall, the recommendations urge the board and lawmakers to continue developing a more transparent and fair system that better reflects student growth and ensures stronger support for struggling schools.

    The department is asking the board to consider the proposal to adjust the timeline for rolling out new cut scores to avoid “confusion” and to ensure divisions can fully prepare without having to manage multiple major changes each year.

    If approved, the plan starts this upcoming school year. The Department of Education will provide divisions with a preview of results under the higher standards. Schools’ academic progress labels will also change, from “off track” to “approaching expectations,” and from “on track” to “meets expectations.”

    Under the proposal, if a student recently moved to the U.S. and is still learning English, they are exempt from the reading assessment in their first year (2026-2027).

    High school ratings will use current achievement data instead of longer-term cohort results. Elementary and middle schools won’t be penalized for having too few English Learner students to get a fair evaluation.

    For the 2027-2028 school year, the department plans to preview updated School Performance and Support Framework results for divisions without consequences.

    Implementation will start in 2028-2029 with a single increase in cut scores and the adoption of the new SPSF version.

    Test data from the 2028-2029 school year will be released in the summer of 2029, and accountability data will be published in the fall of 2029, reflecting the new cut scores.

    One area that wasn’t mentioned in the proposal was whether the board’s interest in having Virginia’s cut scores meet the “proficient” standard set by the National Assessment of Educational Progress would change.

    This standard is defined as a student demonstrating a deeper understanding of complex topics and the ability to apply them in real-world situations.

    Gov. Abigail Spanberger appointed four new members to the nine-member board, which remains controlled by Youngkin’s appointees, most of whom supported a gradual four-year increase last November that would have been completed during the 2029-2030 school year.

    The proposal would wrap up during the 2028-2029 school year.

    Hansen, the board’s vice president, will finish his term June 30 and his replacement will be appointed by Spanberger’s administration.

    The board is not expected to take any action on the proposal on Thursday, their next scheduled meeting.

  • Federal government scouts for interest in mineral mining off Virginia shores

    Federal government scouts for interest in mineral mining off Virginia shores

    The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has pitched the possibility of leasing areas of the outer continental shelf off Virginia’s shores for mineral mining. Over the next month, the agency will seek comments from seabed mining industries interested in leasing portions of the coast.

    The move is part of President Donald Trump’s effort to increase domestic production of minerals, which are needed for the production of electronics and defense materials.

    “Virginia’s offshore mineral resources present a pathway to lessen foreign dependence and reinforce America’s strategic position by establishing secure domestic supply chains,” BOEM Acting Director Matt Diacona said in a statement.

    The area that is under consideration for the lease sale is a massive swath next to the Eastern Shore that the Southern Environmental Law Center noted is larger than the state of Delaware.

    The entire zone under consideration would not be leased, but if the mining industry shows interest in extracting minerals off the coast, BOEM would then identify areas that could be available for a lease. From there, environmental tests and potential impacts would be analyzed before a lease is granted.

    The SELC and Environment Virginia quickly condemned the idea of allowing private companies to conduct industrial dredging to remove large amounts of sediment from the ocean floor with heavy machinery. Both groups cited the major environmental risks it could pose.

    From dolphins breaching the waves to seabirds soaring above our heads, a visit to Virginia’s coast is a reminder of the vibrant ecosystems we are lucky enough to have right over the horizon. Ripping up vast swaths of the seafloor puts this ocean heritage at risk,” said Elly Wilson, the state director of Environment Virginia.

    Virginia has not conducted offshore mineral mining before. The SELC is gearing up to fight the potential lease and likened it to proposals for offshore drilling.

    Following 2015 and 2018 proposals by BOEM to offer offshore leases for oil and gas production, the Virginia General Assembly passed a law in 2020 banning the permitting and leasing of seabeds within 50 miles of the commonwealth’s shores for oil and gas production. But that law still allows for mineral mining.

    “This beloved public resource belongs to the people, not private, extractive industry. Opening Virginia’s federal waters to seabed mining would put countless essential resources at risk, and that’s not a risk we can or should take,” said Megan Huynh with SELC’s wetlands and coasts program.

    Environment Virginia suggested that mining companies would be interested in heavy mineral sands in the deep water locations and phosphorites in the shallower waters.

    The United States Geological Survey states that “titanium, zirconium, and rare earth elements, needed to manufacture, for example, modern electronics for consumer and defense applications” are commonly found in those heavy mineral sands.

    The nation relies on imports of these minerals from foreign countries across the globe, which the Trump administration wants to end..

    A public comment period on the potential interest in this mining effort will be open on the Federal Register website until July 23.

  • Spanberger unveils reformed practices for Va. prisons and council on corrections

    Spanberger unveils reformed practices for Va. prisons and council on corrections

    A new council convened by Gov. Abigail Spanberger aims to help solve longstanding issues in Virginia’s prisons that residents and correctional officers have expressed concerns about for years.

    The Governor’s Community Partnership Council On Corrections, which Spanberger announced Tuesday, will bring together representatives from advocacy groups, faith-based organizations, healthcare and public safety groups and former prisoners to share their experiences and work towards solutions.

    Two years ago a handful of prisoners at Red Onion State Prison, the most embattled correctional institution in the state, burned themselves in protest of living conditions and in attempts to transfer elsewhere.

    Allegations of racism and retaliation by correctional officers were not ruled out by a state watchdog investigation at the prison and a class action lawsuit on behalf of prisoners who say they were abused will head to trial later this year.

    Federal judge allows Va. inmates rights’ lawsuits to move forward

    “The people living in Virginia’s prisons are not forgotten on our watch,” Spanberger said at a press conference announcing the new council held at the Virginia Department of Corrections headquarters in Richmond.

    Virginia Public Safety and Homeland Security Secretary Stanley Meador emphasized that the council will empower participants to propose solutions to problems and help the administration “see things we can’t see.”

    Shawn Weneta, a policy strategist who has helped shape some criminal justice law changes in recent years, commended the creation of the council. He noted that some VADOC changes first began under the previous director but is pleased with the progress that the new administration is building.

    Speaking as a formerly incarcerated person, he emphasized that the council’s mission can best succeed by including “those most directly impacted by the system.”

    Ahead of assembling the official council, Spanberger’s administration has already conducted engagement within prisons and implemented her Executive Order 12, which entailed enhanced training for correctional officers and building partnerships with communities.

    From January to May of this year, Spanberger said use of force across all VADOC facilities has declined by 39%, serious inmate-on-staff assaults dropped 56%, lockdowns decreased by 27%, confirmed overdoses dropped 47%, while suspected overdoses dipped 12%.

    Virginia prisons have stopped using five-point restraints, which can be harmful for people in mental health crises, she said.

    The practice of isolating inmates in restorative housing, a persistent problem, has dropped by 20%.

    Restorative housing is Virginia state code’s euphemism for solitary confinement. It removes inmates from general populations and houses them in solitary cells.

    Restorative housing is used when there’s a threat of gang violence and as a disciplinary measure for inmates who violate prison rules.

    When asked how the reduction in restorative housing was made possible, Spanberger shared that staff training refreshers since she took office have focused on deescalation, which doesn’t exacerbate situations where an inmate may be in crisis or agitated.

    Spanberger also said her administration is considering how to fine tune the state’s Step Down program.

    Step Down is supposed to offer people placed in restorative housing a pathway out by helping address root causes of why they were placed in solitary housing and giving them measures to transition out of it.

    Several current and former inmates have relayed to The Mercury in recent years that restorative housing has been heavily utilized and people sometimes spend weeks or years, rather than days, in it.

    A third-party report to state lawmakers in late 2024 confirmed that at least one facility had placed the majority of its residents under solitary housing.

    Spanberger said her administration wants to be “making sure that every movement is documented on why someone is in restorative housing and their pathways out of it.”

    Under her direction, VADOC has also started to solve visitor access issues.

    After hearing tales of disparate visitation access, Spanberger identified COVID-era restrictions — like less seating and fewer visitor time slots — as a contributing factor.

    In recent months, VADOC has worked to restore past seating capacities in prisons’ visitor centers and expand visitor time slots, the governor said. She also signed a law that creates more guidance and takes into account the needs of long-distance travelers who come to see their loved ones behind bars.

    This “benefits, not just the family, but the person who is incarcerated,” she said.

    With Joseph Walters now serving as director of VADOC, Spanberger’s administration established a new code of ethics for VADOC employees and mandated refreshed training.

    Staffing issues have also plagued Virginia’s prisons. Walters and Meador shared that they’re very proud that their agencies’ work so far has been achieved even with a 21% staffing vacancy.

    This means, they said, that current staffers are working longer hours and pledging deeper commitment to their tasks. But rebuilding employee teams will be critical to halt turnover and alleviate burnout.

    Walters, Meador and Spanberger also hosted in-person engagement sessions with 13 advocacy groups that the governor said had gone unheard by the state’s top leaders for years.

    She called it “stunning” how long some groups had tried to relay concerns to previous administrations and that she hopes her efforts to strengthen communication can “build a foundation for after I am no longer in office.”

    Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct the spelling of Walters.

  • Trump’s policies won’t bring back coal, but they are driving up Virginians’ energy costs

    Trump’s policies won’t bring back coal, but they are driving up Virginians’ energy costs

    If virtue signaling has a Trump-era corollary, we might call it vice signaling. That’s what President Donald Trump’s most recent package of subsidies for the coal industry looks like: it infuriates the environmentalists he despises and thereby delivers a little dopamine hit to the president’s base, while accomplishing nothing meaningful for the industry or the nation’s energy supply.

    On the other hand, the administration’s policy moves on energy are definitely hurting the clean technologies that Virginia needs to reach its zero-carbon electricity goals and lower rates for residents.

    Browbeating Republicans in Congress to terminate wind and solar tax credits caused many renewable energy projects to get canceled across the U.S., wiping out $16 billion of clean energy investments; other projects have been blocked or lost grant funding.

    Unable to stop offshore wind by any other means, the administration has even resorted to paying developers to abandon leases, with payments totaling more than $2.5 billion.

    This mischief is hurting American consumers, and nowhere is that clearer than in Virginia. Our need for massively more power to feed the data center industry makes us especially vulnerable to the effects of Trump’s monkeying around with the energy markets. With less low-cost wind and solar available to buy, our utilities have to burn more high-cost coal. Our rates go up, and so does pollution.

    The irony is that even Virginia Republicans don’t champion coal anymore, having thrown it over for cheaper and cleaner-burning fracked gas. Four years ago, then-Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s energy plan touted what he called an all-of-the-above strategy that was mainly focused on fossil gas. About the only time the plan mentioned coal was to note that it had fallen to only 4% of Virginia’s electricity generation.

    Republicans here still rise to the defense of one coal plant, Dominion Energy’s Virginia City Hybrid Energy Center (VCHEC) in Wise County. But that’s in spite of the cost, not because of it.

    Last time we looked, VCHEC was losing millions of dollars annually – money that comes out of customer pockets. Legislators defend it only because the jobs it provides and the local taxes it pays keep Wise County afloat.

    This importance to Southwest Virginia earned VCHEC special treatment in the 2020 Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA), which aimed to slash both carbon and costs quickly by forcing the closure of Dominion’s other coal and oil-fired generation. Legally, VCHEC is allowed to stick around until 2045, though few people expected it would survive market realities that long.

    In spite of its poor economics, however, coal use has surged in Virginia and nationwide as demand from data centers makes utilities scramble to produce every possible electron. If you don’t have enough cheap renewable energy, you have to use whatever you’ve got, never mind the cost.

    Five years ago, Dominion expected to run VCHEC only 15.5% of the time in 2024, less than 11% of the time in 2025, and only a little more than 6% by 2030. Instead, the plant is generating more this year than it has at any time this decade.

    The only other large-scale coal plant still operational in Virginia, the Clover coal plant co-owned by Dominion and Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, puts out well under half the electricity it did ten years ago, generating mainly during summer heatwaves and winter cold spells. But it too runs more often now than it did in the first few years of this decade.

    Dominion also operates the Mount Storm coal plant in West Virginia. It serves Virginia customers, but its location outside Virginia means the VCEA didn’t require its closure.

    Appalachian Power operates coal plants in West Virginia, too, producing power for its residents in that state as well as Southwest Virginia.

    The lousy economics of coal mean all these plants generate significantly less power than they used to – but, again, more than they did just three or four years ago, thanks to the demand pressure of data centers. (Well, that and a Trump-style insistence by West Virginia regulators that utilities run their coal plants most of the time, no matter how much it hurts consumers).

    A similar dynamic is playing out across the country. Coal use jumped in 2025 nationwide as data centers demanded more energy, adding to air pollution and killing more people.

    The Trump administration is determined to make matters even worse.

    Since resuming office last year, Trump has ordered the Department of Defense to buy power from coal plants for its military installations. His Department of Energy has ordered units to keep operating at five coal plants that were about to close because they lose money. His Environmental Protection Agency is loosening pollution standards for coal plants to save them money.

    In February the Energy Department announced it would spend $175 million on six projects to extend the life of coal plants in West Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina and Kentucky. The federally-owned Tennessee Valley Authority announced it would keep coal units open at two power plants that were previously slated for closure.

    Then, in June, the Energy Department announced another $500 million in coal spending, including $425 million for a bunch more plant upgrades and a $75 million subsidy for a coal export terminal.

    Most recently, the department issued plans to throw $350 million at four more coal projects, including restarting a closed plant in Maryland and subsidizing construction of two new plants, one at Mt. Storm.

    Some of this spending will keep old plants limping along; some of it smells of grift. One of the proposed new coal plants getting an $18 million contribution from federal taxpayers is the project of a MAGA activist with no energy industry experience.

    Indeed, the idea of propping up last century’s technology to build an inefficient industrial plant that won’t ever make money has a distinctly retro vibe, reminiscent of the Soviet Union in its heyday. The problem with Trump‘s vision is that since these money-losing plants couldn’t be completed before his term expires, no self-respecting capitalist will build them.

    Trump’s vice signaling is having its intended effect in one respect, though: environmentalists hate it. So, for that matter, do economists and grid experts.

    One grid expert I spoke with, Mike Jacobs, a senior manager at the Union of Concerned Scientists, noted that “if the goal was to mine more coal and send more of it up a smokestack, it would make more sense to subsidize coal purchases directly.” Building a coal plant, he said, is “a vanity project.”

    What Trump isn’t accomplishing for coal, however, Big Tech is.

    Data centers’ demand for power, coupled with Trump’s stifling of the renewable energy sector, keeps coal plants belching along and drives up electricity costs for everyone. That these companies have a long history of virtue signaling with sustainability promises they haven’t met is just its own kind of irony.

  • Miscarriage management remains muddled 4 years after Dobbs

    Miscarriage management remains muddled 4 years after Dobbs

    Mylissa McNeill never expected to be a mother. But when she learned she was pregnant in the spring of 2022, at age 41, she and her partner were happy and excited at the prospect of parenting a little girl they planned to name Maeve.

    On June 24, 2022, about one month after McNeill discovered she was pregnant, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in its Dobbs ruling, eliminating the constitutional right to an abortion and empowering states to outlaw it. Missouri was the first state to enact a ban; at that time, McNeill was living in Joplin, Missouri.

    In August 2022, McNeill miscarried. It was the beginning of a health crisis that plagues her to this day and that she blames, at least in part, on hospitals’ reluctance to provide miscarriage management care that might run afoul of state abortion bans.

    Missouri’s law prohibited nearly all abortions, but it allowed abortion providers who were charged or sued under the law to escape punishment by arguing that they acted in a “medical emergency” to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to avert “a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.”

    Missouri’s ban is no longer in effect — it was overturned by voters in 2024 — but such language is typical: All 13 states that currently have abortion bans allow the procedure to protect the life of the pregnant woman. Some, but not all, of the bans also have exceptions to protect the health of the woman.

    But patients and providers have argued in lawsuits challenging the bans that such exceptions are too ill defined to give doctors and hospitals enough confidence to provide timely care. McNeill believes that her persistent health problems are the result of delayed care.

    In early August 2022, less than two months after Missouri’s ban took effect, McNeill’s water broke at about 18 weeks. She says her OB-GYN told her the pregnancy was no longer viable, and she sought an abortion and miscarriage management procedure known as dilation and curettage, or D&C, in hospitals in both Missouri and Kansas (where abortion was legal). However, doctors declined to provide miscarriage care while they were able to detect fetal cardiac activity.

    After three days of bleeding and aching, McNeill finally received treatment at a hospital in Illinois. When she had a subsequent tubal ligation to prevent future pregnancies, McNeill said medical staff told her she had scar tissue resulting from an infection she developed after her water broke.

    “While they were in there, they saw what happened,” McNeill said. “The infection went outside of my uterus. It went to my liver, and my liver is permanently attached in multiple places. It’s attached to my uterus; it’s attached to my stomach lining.”

    McNeill says the lingering effects of that infection include severe bouts of vomiting and significant financial hardship as she has struggled to pay for care without steady health care coverage.

    “I literally break all the blood vessels in my skin. … This kind of pain is — there’s no word for it,” said McNeill, who shared with Stateline pictures of her face covered in red splotches, her nose magenta. “The delay is what really upset me, because women have died with less time than I had, and that delay and the infection that I did get from this by waiting three days, it destroyed my life.”

    Last year, states including Texas, Kentucky and Tennessee enacted laws designed to provide additional clarity on medical exceptions to their bans, but confusion persists in those states and others. Stories of denied miscarriage care continue to emerge, including in a brand-new lawsuit in Texas, and several deaths have been attributed in part to abortion restrictions, including in Georgia and Texas. Research has linked abortion restrictions to higher rates of maternal death and injury.

    “The four years since the Dobbs (v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization) decision have unfortunately proven what OB-GYNs already knew: abortion care is inextricable from reproductive health care,” Molly Meegan, chief legal officer and general counsel for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, wrote in a statement.

    “Bans and restrictions on abortion care have resulted in patients across the country being denied care, even in instances of pregnancy loss and miscarriage.”

    A new study published last month by the Journal of the American Medical Association found that since the Dobbs decision, in states where abortion bans took effect, miscarriage management has shifted away from medical intervention toward more of a “wait-and-see” approach.

    But anti-abortion groups blame doctors and abortion-rights advocates for creating confusion around the medical exceptions in abortion bans, insisting it is clear what is a medically indicated abortion and what is purely elective.

    “As architects of the majority of the nation’s pro-life laws, Americans United for Life has been very clear that none prevent women from receiving life-saving miscarriage care. Efforts to suggest otherwise are made in bad faith” said Gavin Oxley, a spokesperson for the group.

    “Doctors who delay or altogether deny medical treatment must be held accountable for the harm they inflict upon women. If doctors are not clear on this four years after Dobbs, they clearly have not been listening.”

    Dr. Susan Bane, an OB-GYN in Greenville, North Carolina, who is on the board of directors for the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, told Stateline that doctors — especially the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists — have unfairly blamed abortion bans for the denial of medical care to pregnant or miscarrying women.

    “There’s nothing, I mean zero, about any of these laws that say you have to have her dying or septic,” Bane said. “I’ve done this hundreds of times in the last 30 years, where the baby was alive, and I sat at the bedside and had an excruciating conversation with a woman to say, ‘I am so sorry, but if we don’t move towards delivery, I’m worried both of you will die.’”

    She said her organization supports state laws, like one signed in South Dakota earlier this year, that redefine “abortion” as the intentional ending of the life of the “unborn child.” Supporters say such laws will allow doctors to manage miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies and other pregnancy-related emergencies.

    “It’s sad that more clarification isn’t happening, but the blame really started right in my profession.” Bane said.

    But Meegan said attempts to legislate health exceptions fall short of protecting all patients.

    “There is no law or exception that can account for the immense variety of medical situations that can present in pregnancy,” she wrote. “And there is no additional legislation that can undo the harm created by abortion bans short of repealing the bans themselves.”

    McNeill said that following her miscarriage, she lost her job and the health insurance that came with it. She sued and then reached a settlement with the Missouri hospital that she believes denied her prompt care. But she continues to search for relief from her health problems, and says she has racked up substantial medical debt.

    She and her husband moved to Arkansas and then Kansas in search of the financial stability that has eluded them since her miscarriage almost four years ago.

    “My debt is in the millions with all of this illness without coverage for long periods,” McNeill said. “Now that my credit is destroyed, I’ll never be able to buy a house again while in this health.”

    Stateline reporter Sofia Resnick can be reached at [email protected].

    This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Virginia Mercury, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.