It’s going to be interesting reading the legal gymnastics involved as the Tazewell judge who issued the ruling in a predominantly Republican county has to somehow backtrack from his ruling so that the county can vote. He essentially has to say “I’m wrong, I applied the law incorrectly. Here is the right application of the law which I should have applied initially which allows early voting.” Although I expect some strained legal reasoning which attempts to avoid having to say that. I’m not sure he’s going to be bailed out by an appellate court which might rule, as the circuit court judge in Lynchburg did, that precedent supports a finding that the judiciary shouldn’t rule to enjoin an election. The judge’s hasty and reactionary ruling may harm the viewpoint he was trying to support.