Although class actions in Virginia state courts have been discussed for some time, the Commonwealth still lacks a class action procedure. Earlier this year, the General Assembly passed Senate Bill 229 and House Bill 449, which would have created a comprehensive framework for class action litigation in Virginia state courts. Governor Abigail Spanberger, however, vetoed the proposed legislation. As a result, Virginia returned to the status quo, with no formal class action mechanism for plaintiffs to pursue class actions in state court. While the issue may be settled for now, Virginia businesses should expect further General Assembly efforts to create a class action framework for the Commonwealth.
The Original Bill Passed by the Virginia General Assembly (Prior to Governor Spanberger’s Proposed Amendments)
Both the Virginia House of Delegates and the Virginia Senate passed identical legislation to create Virginia’s first state court civil class action mechanism. The class action procedure bill cleared both chambers in February 2026 and went to the Governor’s desk for approval. It was based in large part on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, but went further in several plaintiff-friendly ways:
- While the new bill retained a traditional predominance requirement, it expressly instructed courts to consider “the practical ability of individual class members to pursue their claims without certification.” Arguably, this language could signal a preference for class treatment where claims are small and impractical to bring individually (something not found in Rule 23).
- The new bill did not include a venue requirement; instead, it would have allowed plaintiffs to select forums for class actions under general venue principles.
- The General Assembly’s bill lowered the bar on what was required for class notice. Where Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 mandates “the best notice that is practicable under the circumstances,” the General Assembly’s bill required only “reasonable notice.”
- The General Assembly’s bill also required notice of a proposed dismissal of any case previously certified as a class action, which could have been a roadblock to early resolution of claims and obtaining early dismissal.
- The General Assembly’s bill adopted a broader interlocutory appeal standard modeled on 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). While Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) permits discretionary interlocutory appeals only from orders granting or denying class certification, the new law would have provided that any order in a state court class action could be appealed mid-case if the trial court certified that it presented a controlling question of law, there was substantial ground for difference of opinion, and an immediate appeal could materially advance the termination of the litigation.
- The General Assembly’s bill amended the Virginia Consumer Protection Act’s (“VCPA”) damages provision to expressly state that it applies to class actions under the new proposed law, enabling plaintiffs to obtain class-wide actual damages or statutory damages of $500 per violation, or, for willful conduct, the greater of treble actual damages or up to $1,000 per violation in class suits.
Without question, the class action procedure bill passed by the General Assembly would have expanded class-wide relief under the VCPA and made Virginia a substantially more attractive forum for consumer and privacy litigation. The class action bill also would have made Virginia a far more attractive forum for plaintiffs seeking to bring class action claims involving employment, consumer protection, property damage, and product liability that might be impractical to bring individually.
Governor Spanberger’s Proposed Amendments
In March 2026, Governor Spanberger returned the class action procedure bill to the General Assembly with proposed amendments. Among other things, her amendments would have limited venue for state court class actions to four regional circuit courts: (1) Fairfax County; (2) the City of Richmond; (3) the City of Roanoke; and (4) the City of Norfolk, with venue determined by which court was geographically closest to the named class representative.
Her proposed amendments also would have provided courts with enhanced summary judgment authority in class actions by requiring the Supreme Court of Virginia to amend its Rules to adopt Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 as the governing procedural rules for summary judgment in class actions and, importantly, to state that Virginia’s statutory bar against the use of deposition testimony in support of summary judgment would not apply in class actions. Importantly, this would allow defendants to use discovery depositions to support summary judgment motions in class actions.
Furthermore, her proposed amendments limited recovery of class action damages under the VCPA to actual damages only, meaning no statutory minimums and no trebling in class action lawsuits. The Governor removed the “per violation” language from the VCPA.
Even with the Governor’s proposed amendments, this bill’s new state court class action mechanism promised to make Virginia a significantly more attractive forum for class action litigation.
Governor Spanberger Vetoes the Class Action Procedure Bill After the General Assembly Rejects Her Amendments
The General Assembly rejected the Governor’s proposed amendments and returned the original bill to the Governor, leaving her a choice: sign the original bill or veto it.
On May 29, 2026, Governor Spanberger vetoed the class action procedure bill. The veto halts what would have created Virginia’s first-ever class action procedure.
The veto was not a rejection of class actions in principle. In her veto explanation, Governor Spanberger stated:
“I support the General Assembly’s goal of providing a class action mechanism that can be used by plaintiffs in Virginia courts. I offered amendments to ensure that when Virginia adopts its first-ever class action procedure, we do so in a tailored and judicious way – building on longstanding, federal precedent while providing regional circuit courts an opportunity to develop expertise. The General Assembly did not accept these amendments.”
What Businesses Should Know–And What Comes Next
For now, Virginia is one of only two states without a state class action procedure (the other being Mississippi).
Business groups and tort reform organizations strongly opposed the class action legislation, warning that it would increase litigation costs, encourage forum shopping, and expose businesses to potentially massive statutory damage awards. Governor Spanberger’s veto of the bill is a significant victory for the Virginia business community and for the Commonwealth’s historically business-friendly reputation.
The issue is far from settled. Supporters of establishing a framework for class action litigation in the Commonwealth may revisit the issue during the next General Assembly session in January 2027. The Governor’s amendments offer a roadmap for a bill she could sign, with venue limits, the availability of summary judgment in class actions, and narrower VCPA class-wide damages. Businesses that do significant business in the Commonwealth should still note the bill’s passage by the General Assembly, as Virginia could pass a class action statute implementing a state court class action mechanism in the near future.
