Summary#

Senate Resolution 167, “Nominating persons to be elected to general district court judgeships,” is a Virginia Senate resolution, not a bill amending an existing Act. It nominates 14 people for six-year terms as general district court judges; the stated action is nomination, not confirmation that they were elected or took office.

• The nominees are: Mary Elizabeth Sherwin (Fourth District, term starts June 1, 2026); Del M. Mauhrine Brown (Sixth, May 1); Lisa C. Francisco (Tenth, July 1); Ericka M. Battle, Tiffany K. Booker, and Melissa H. Hoy (Twelfth, July 1, May 1, and July 1, respectively).
• It also nominates David R. Danieli and Alexandra P. Vakos (Fifteenth, April 1); Mary Catherine H. Gibbs (Eighteenth, May 16); and Dawn M. Futrell (Twenty-first, May 1).
• The remaining nominees are Jason D. Morgan (Twenty-third, November 1); Christopher Todd Gilbert (Twenty-sixth, July 1); Robin J. Kegley (Twenty-seventh, July 1); and Joshua H. Newberry (Twenty-ninth, April 1). All start dates are in 2026.

What it means for you#

• People in the named districts: The resolution identifies people nominated for judgeships there. It does not change residents’ legal rights or court procedures.
• The nominees and courts: The resolution names the nominees and proposed six-year terms. It does not itself say they were elected, when they would take office if elected, or whether every position is filled.
• General public: The resolution does not create a new court, program, fee, or penalty.

Money#

No publicly available information on cost.

What is unclear#

• The resolution does not state the result of any election of the nominees or whether they took office.
• It gives no information about the selection process, criteria, or reasons for choosing these nominees.
• It does not explain whether the listed terms correspond to vacant seats, new seats, or replacements.
• No publicly available information is provided about any costs or staffing changes.

Case for#

• A possible argument for the resolution is that it identifies nominees for judgeships and gives a proposed term length and start date for each.
• Naming nominees by district may make clear which courts the nominations concern.

Case against#

• The resolution does not explain how nominees were selected or provide information that would help readers assess that process.
• It does not establish that the nominees were elected or took office, so the resolution alone does not show whether the positions were filled.