Early voting, late voting, no-ID voting, voting by mail, ballot harvesting, an “election day” that goes on for weeks. All of these strategies have been sought, even demanded, by Democrats in order to meet their agenda needs that no one is hindered from voting.

Now a prominent state attorney general is arguing against that very point. And it could be that the U.S. Supreme Court will return America to a practice of voting on one day, only.

The situation has erupted in Virginia’s redistricting war. There, Democrats had voters approve a plan for their party to control 10 of the state’s 11 congressional districts. It’s now divided 6-5 for Democrats.

The state constitution requires two separate votes by the legislature in support of such a plan, with one “intervening” election. The problem cited by the state Supreme Court, which threw out the election, was that early voting already had started last year when the legislature gave its initial approval to the plan.

The means there was no intervening election. Except that Jay Jones, the state attorney general “who fantasized about executing a Republican colleague and wished death on his children, is arguing in court now that only election “day” should count, not the election weeks his state uses.

An analysis at the Federalist points out his dilemma.

“It’s unsurprising that, in his typographically-challenged frenzy to salvage Virginia Democrats’ gerrymandering efforts, he has accidentally made a case to the U.S. Supreme Court against the months-long ‘election season’ that his fellow Democrats prize. The only thing that could make the cosmic irony sweeter would be the Supreme Court taking Jones up on his request to interpret the Constitution as mandating a single Election Day,” it explained.

In his pursuit of a redistricting war, the analysis said, “Jones has placed himself in the awkward position of arguing that Virginia’s 45-day election actually takes place on a single day. In an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, Jones argues that federal law ‘expressly fixes a single day for the ‘election’ of Representatives and Delegates to Congress.'”

He cites that requirement in the Virginia Constitution. And he cites federal law that elections shall be on “The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November.”

“Of course, Jones is asking to have it both ways: he would presumably like to keep Virginia’s expansive voting season — one of the longest in the country — but would also like the court to define the 45-day period as a single-day event to protect Democrats’ gerrymandering attempt. But the court can easily consider his spirited defense of a singular Election Day without indulging his contradictory demands,” the analysis said.

His points resemble those made by the Republican National Committee and others in a case pending before the Supreme Court now.

That fight is over a scheme in Mississippi to count mail ballots that arrive five days after election day.

When the case was argued, Justice Samuel Alito said, “We don’t have Election Day anymore. We have election month or we have election months. Early voting can start a month before the election. The ballots can be received a month after the election.”

Other justices echoed the perspective.

“In an amicus brief for the Claremont Institute’s Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, filed in support of the RNC in its case against Mississippi, John Eastman laid out a thorough history of the constitutional intent motivating the establishment of a single Election Day,” the analysis said.

“A multi-day election is not simply ‘more time to vote;’ it constitutes a fundamental alteration of the legal nature of the event. It transforms the election from a discrete, simultaneous act of sovereign choice into an extended process – one in which the electorate remains fluid and exposed to the dangers the Constitution was designed to foreclose,” Eastman noted.