While Virginia’s bans on “assault firearms” and magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds was signed into law on May 14, and is scheduled to go into effect on July 1, it remains to be seen if the bans actually go into effect, and if they do, whether and where they will actually be enforced in the Old Dominion.
As we reported the day Governor Abigail Spanberger (D) signed the clearly unconstitutional ban on some of the most popular firearms and magazines in America, NRA, working with other organizations and two individuals, immediately filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Our complaint argues that Virginia’s bans are unconstitutional because they prohibit many of the most commonly possessed arms in the nation. As the U.S. Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller, a ban on arms “in common use” violates the Second Amendment.
NRA, working again with others, filed a separate suit that same day that challenges the new law in state court. That complaint argues that the bans violate the arms guarantee in Article 1, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution. It further contends that, because the Virginia Supreme Court has interpreted that provision as coextensive with the Second Amendment, it bars prohibitions on commonly owned arms.
There have been other legal challenges to these bans, and there may soon be one coming from the Trump administration’s Department of Justice’s (DoJ) Civil Rights Division. U.S. Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, Harmeet Dhillon, has been leading the charge to file federal challenges to a number of anti-gun laws that violate the protections enshrined in the Second Amendment.
After it was announced that the Virginia bans had been signed, Dhillon quickly posted to X, “See you in court!”
How quickly the courts will act on these challenges is anybody’s guess, and regardless of what decisions are handed down, it is unlikely any of them will be resolved until every step of the appeals process in either the federal or state courts is exhausted. If the courts rule in favor of the Second Amendment or the Virginia arms guarantee, anti-gun Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones (D) will surely appeal. And if any ruling goes the other way, NRA and others will appeal.
So, we could be looking at several years of court cases.
On the other hand, there’s the very real possibility that the bans will be neutered in other ways; at least in parts of Virginia.
The Washington Times reported that prosecutors in five Virginia counties have indicated there will be no prosecutions under the new law in their jurisdictions. Commonwealth’s Attorneys in Powhatan, Pulaski, Scott, Smyth, and Spotsylvania Counties have all signaled there will be no prosecutions for otherwise law-abiding Virginians simply possessing the items Governor Spanberger is trying to eradicate.
Of course, prosecutions for actual offenses committed by criminals while in possession of ANY firearms—irrespective of their status as “good” or “bad” guns as determined by anti-gun extremists—will continue in these counties.
Pulaski County Commonwealth’s Attorney Justin L. Griffith stated, “I am not going to take law-abiding citizens as of June 30th, 2026, and criminalize that same behavior on July 1st, 2026, solely on the basis of this new law.”
“Justice has been and will continue to be sought against those that use guns in the commission of crimes, outside of this new law,” Griffith went on to say. “As such, my office will not support criminal charges resulting solely from technical violations of the unconstitutional assault weapon ban.”
The Royal Examiner reports that Warren County Commonwealth’s Attorney John S. Bell has stated his office will also not prosecute violations of the new law as long as no other criminal activity is involved.
So, we are currently at six counties, thus far, where Commonwealth’s Attorneys will do what they can to protect the Second Amendment against Spanberger’s unconstitutional bans. In addition, Ammoland reports that “seven sheriffs from Amherst, Campbell, Carroll, Page, Floyd, Scott, and Washington counties have told their departments that the ban will not be enforced. Additionally, 58 localities have enacted protections to prevent the enforcement of the new gun laws.”
In response to this deluge of opposition, radical anti-gun AG Jay Jones told the Virginia Scope, “Gun violence is a key driver of violent crime, and the leading cause of death for young people in our Commonwealth. The General Assembly passed and the Governor signed critical legislation to reduce violent crime and protect our communities. Commonwealth’s Attorneys are elected to enforce our laws, which is what we expect them to do when these laws take effect on July 1.”
This is the same Jay Jones who once implied that, in a hypothetical scenario of deciding to eliminate two of history’s worst genocidal madmen or a specific current Republican politician (no, not Donald Trump), he suggested eliminating the Republican.
Jones was also accused of suggesting the same Republican, then Virginia House Speaker Todd Gilbert, should experience his “wife (watching) her own child die in her arms so that Gilbert might reconsider his political views….”
Spanberger’s office issued a similar message (similar to the response to the new gun ban, not the horrific personal attack on Gilbert) to the Virginia Scope, stating, “Governor Spanberger believes that firearms designed to inflict maximum casualties do not belong on Virginia streets. This important step to protect families, law enforcement officers, and communities from gun violence was passed by majorities in the General Assembly and signed into law by the Governor. The people of Virginia must be able to trust that all Commonwealth’s Attorneys will uphold the rule of law and keep Virginians safe.”
And while prosecutorial discretion has always been a hallmark of our nation’s judicial process, the apparent objection to it in this case by these top Virginia Democrats is tinged with a bit of irony. During the administration of another recent anti-gun governor, Ralph Northam (D), a law was enacted that strengthened this discretion. This was in response to certain Commonwealth’s Attorneys deciding they would not prosecute some misdemeanor marijuana cases, but the law that forced judges to grant a motion to dismiss certain cases emanating from Commonwealth’s Attorneys would also apply to cases involving Spanberger’s bans.
Will anti-gun extremists now try to force through a new law that would create a carve-out to force the prosecution of these gun cases? Only time will tell, but such an effort would certainly be met with strong opposition, and if successful, yet another round of lawsuits.
Ultimately, Virginia is likely to remain headline material in the debate over the Second Amendment for the foreseeable future, so stay tuned.
More Like This From Around The NRA
