All this talk about ticket splitting shows how important it is to make a well-informed choice of Virginia’s next attorney general when we vote this fall. Contrary to belief and advertising, the AG is not Virginia’s “chief law enforcement officer” or even the state’s chief prosecutor (except in limited cases) but has a much broader job as the commonwealth’s “general and consumer counsel,” “civil rights enforcement officer” and “legal advisor.”
The AG is the people’s lawyer serving as our advocate in consumer matters, defending our decisions as jurors in criminal appeals, protecting our investments in charitable organizations and institutions, initiating and overseeing prosecution of government fraud and conflicts of interest, enforcing our state human rights laws, and advising the state officials and agencies who serve us about their work and the work of their agencies.
Just as you carefully choose the lawyer who advises your business and your family, each Virginian should look carefully at the qualifications and stated priorities of candidates running for AG in 2025.
How will the candidate represent your interests as “consumer counsel?”
The AG is charged with representing the “interests of the people as consumers.” Will they prosecute those who deceive consumers by making false claims about their products or services? Will they actively protect consumers’ interests when the State Corporation Commission reviews insurance, electric and telephone rates? What impact will campaign contributions have on their actions?
How will each candidate decide when to challenge or defend a law passed by the legislature, appeal a case or sign an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief?
Past Virginia attorneys general have: 1) defended a plainly unconstitutional statute passed by the legislature that sought to ban a particular abortion procedure (the so-called partial birth abortion bill); 2) filed lawsuits attacking the application of certain EPA rules and the federal Motor Voter Law to Virginia; and 3) decided not to defend the unconstitutional amendment to our Virginia constitution that denies marriage equality to LGBTQ Virginians. The current Virginia AG is leading an effort in the courts to ban TikTok, attacking DEI programs, defending solitary confinement in state prisons and failing to defend Virginia universities under attack by the federal government. He has also obtained three writs of actual innocence for people who were wrongly convicted. What policy choices will guide the next Virginia AG in deciding what cases to take on?
What approach will the candidate take to issuing formal AG opinions on the law?
The AG is required to issue formal opinions interpreting state and federal law when asked by certain public officials. Just as it is important to know how a judge will apply the law, it is important to know how the AG will perform this judge-like responsibility. Will the AG be an “activist,” “traditionalist” or “strict constructionist” when it comes to interpreting the law? Virginia’s current AG has opined that federally recognized Indian tribes in Virginia don’t have sovereign dominion over their lands and that college trustees must be loyal to the commonwealth, not the institutions they are appointed to serve. How will the next AG approach this important duty?
Will the candidate be a good steward of your tax dollars?
The AG of Virginia makes a salary of $150,000 a year plus an allowance for expenses of $9,000 and is the managing partner of a public law firm with more than 500 employees and a budget of almost $90 million in state and federal funds. These amounts do not include the cost of additional lawyers paid for by various state agencies but supervised by the AG (e.g., at universities) and the millions of dollars spent annually on outside counsel (private lawyers and law firms who handle matters ranging from intellectual property and immigration to issuance of bonds to collection work) all of which are paid out of state agency budgets ($11 million in 2013-14, the last data available).
One disturbing reality of the AG’s budget management is that the office sought budget language that allows dollars allocated for consumer protection, anti-trust and “business regulation” to be spent on any “litigation initiated by the AG” or on the costs of the civil commitment program that can result in people being committed to state mental health facilities for life after having served their criminal sentences for sex offenses. This means money that was allocated to protect consumers and businesses from high utility and insurance rates and prosecute anti-trust violations can be diverted to non-consumer protection issues and cases. What will the next AG’s budget priorities be?
Is the AG committed to equal opportunity in contracting and employment?
The AG can hire and fire employees at will. Will the next AG seek and hire employees based on merit? Will the candidate commit to ensuring that the office’s hiring and personnel practices reflect a commitment to merit over political affiliation and full equality of opportunity and compensation at all levels of employment? What action will the next AG take to ensure that the office’s contracting and procurement practices result in small, women and minority owned businesses getting their fair market share of the state dollars that the office spends? Will the AG’s office post on its website the federal EEO-1 reports that detail the makeup of their workforces?
How will the next AG fulfill the mandate of the Office for Civil Rights in protecting Virginians against discrimination in employment and public accommodations?
The legislature located the Office for Civil Rights in the AG’s office and recently expanded its authority to investigate and litigate civil rights claims, including the authority to investigate pattern and practice claims of unlawful deprivations of civil rights by law enforcement personnel or agencies. Under AG Miyares, the office is failing to perform the functions assigned to it by the legislature. Staff of the office were fired when Miyares took office, and the legislature had to pass a new law to ensure victims of discrimination could obtain “right to sue” letters that Miyares was required to issue after complaints had languished more than 180 days in their office. How will the office operate in the next AG’s administration?
Bottom line, before you vote, decide whether the candidate you are voting for really will be the “people’s lawyer” and represent your values and policy choices. In some respects, this may be the most important vote you cast in November.
Claire Guthrie Gastañaga is former chief deputy attorney general of Virginia.
