The legal battle over Virginia’s firearm regulations escalated rapidly this week as the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) filed a lawsuit to block a newly signed ban on “assault firearms” and high-capacity magazines.
The legal challenge comes just hours after Governor Abigail Spanberger signed the legislation, which is slated to take effect on July 1.
Under the new law, the import, sale, manufacture, or transfer of an “assault firearm” will be classified as a Class 1 misdemeanor.
READ: Kentucky Rep. Massie Takes Aim At Lobbying Loophole With “AIPAC Act” For Foreign Agent Registry
The legislation defines these weapons as semiautomatic rifles chambered in any caliber other than .22 rimfire that feature specific characteristics, such as threaded barrels, pistol grips, or collapsing stocks. Additionally, the law prohibits any magazine capable of holding more than 15 rounds of ammunition.
SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut criticized the move, arguing that the restricted items are standard equipment for many citizens.
“The firearms and magazines banned in this law aren’t bizarre and unusual outliers, they’re among the most commonly owned guns and magazines in the country,” Kraut stated. He noted that millions of Americans own such firearms for lawful purposes and claimed the law was designed to “gut” constitutional protections.
The lawsuit, titled McDonald v. Katz, argues that the features targeted by the ban actually make firearms safer and easier to handle rather than more dangerous.
The complaint asserts that because these weapons are in common use, they cannot be legally banned. Joining the SAF in the suit are the National Rifle Association, the Firearms Policy Coalition, and two Virginia residents.
READ: U.S. Lands Major Blow Against Tren de Aragua As High-Ranking Leader Extradited From Colombia
Alan M. Gottlieb, founder of the SAF, took aim at the long-term implications for young adults in the commonwealth. “On July 1, anyone turning 18 in Virginia will find out that the rights enjoyed by their predecessors don’t apply to them,” Gottlieb said.
He characterized the legislation as a “sales and transfer ban” that would effectively phase out ownership over time. The plaintiffs indicated they are prepared to fast-track the case to the Supreme Court if necessary to overturn the restrictions.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox
