A version of this originally ran in The Virginian-Pilot on August 17, 2016.

Calm down, governor.

Yes, we all know you're seething because the Supreme Court of Virginia blocked your executive order restoring the voting rights to more than 200,000 felons.

Still, there's no need to act like a sore loser.

You're becoming the Hope Solo of governors. It's not a good look.

In a radio interview Monday, McAuliffe lashed out at the majority of Virginia's Supreme Court justices, accusing them of being "scared" of the Republicans in the General Assembly.

As if only fear could explain their correct interpretation of the commonwealth's constitution.

The governor didn't stop there. According to The Associated Press, McAuliffe went on to whine about the way Virginia selects its justices. That power rests with the General Assembly.

Unsurprisingly, McAuliffe would prefer the governor hand-pick the high court.

God help us.

Instead of grousing about a legal decision that didn't go his way, you'd think McAuliffe would take comfort in the latest Washington Post poll that shows Hillary Clinton up by 8 points among likely voters in Virginia and 14 points among registered voters.

Seems McAuliffe's sloppy, over-reaching executive action wasn't even necessary. At this point, it appears Clinton probably will win Virginia even without the felon vote.

For those who haven't been paying attention, back in April, McAuliffe decided to play chicken with the constitution by unilaterally declaring about 206,000 felons eligible to vote and serve on juries. In essence, he short-circuited the constitutional process that required governors to restore voting rights individually.

Despite his denials, it was clear what McAuliffe was doing: Trying to pad the voter rolls in this important swing state in time for the election of his pal Hillary.

Remember, in 2012, Barack Obama edged out Mitt Romney in Virginia by only 149,298. In a close election, those new voters could make the difference.

In the weeks that followed the governor's brash move, news reports began to show errors in the restorations, including 132 violent sex offenders being held on civil commitments and The Washington Post reported at least one inmate serving two life terms in West Virginia. The mistakes kept McAuliffe aides busy as they scurried around making excuses for the lapses – "oversights," they said – insisting they were no big deal.

Meanwhile, Republican leaders filed suit to reverse the executive action. They were joined, according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch, by "43 Republican, Democratic and independent commonwealth's attorneys (who) weighed in against the governor …"

Finally, on July 22, the high court announced its decision. The names of roughly 13,000 felons who had registered to vote were ordered removed from the rolls.

As soon as the court decision came down, McAuliffe vowed to begin churning out individual restorations, as he should have done in the first place.

"This is what dauntless leadership looks like. Thank you @GovernorVa – proud to call you a friend.-H" tweeted Clinton at the news.

"Dauntless leadership" for following the law and doing what his predecessors had done? Hardly.

Writing for the majority in July, Chief Justice Donald W. Lemons said, "Never before have any of the prior 71 Virginia governors issued a clemency order of any kind – including pardons, reprieves, commutation and restoration orders – to a class of unnamed felons without regard for the nature of the crimes or any other individual circumstances relevant to the request.

"To be sure, no governor of this commonwealth, until now, has even suggested that such a power exists. And the only governors who have seriously considered the question concluded that no such power exists."

One governor who considered a sweeping restoration of rights was Tim Kaine, Clinton's running mate. In 2010, he declined to do so.

"We conclude that a blanket restoration of rights, within the context of current Virginia law would not be proper," wrote Mark E. Rubin, counselor to Kaine in January 2010. "A blanket order restoring the voting rights of everyone would be a rewrite of the law rather than a contemplated use of the executive clemency powers. And, the notion that the Constitution of the Commonwealth could be rewritten via executive order is troubling."

Troubling indeed.

Instead of insulting the justices who ruled against him and trivializing their decision, McAuliffe should apologize to Virginians for trampling on their constitution and vow not to do it again.

But, as anyone who's followed McAuliffe's pugnacious political career knows, that's not his style.