Virginia’s New ‘Assault Firearm’ Ban Is Plainly Unconstitutional, a Federal Lawsuit Argues
Last month was Virginia 12th situation Governor Abigail Spanberger enacts ‘assault weapon’ ban signed The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and two other Second Amendment groups argue that this new law is clearly unconstitutional. McDonald/KatzA. case They filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
“Spanberger’s crazy bill criminalizes constitutionally protected conduct and bans guns protected by the Second Amendment.” in question FPC President Brandon Combs. “We will force Governor Spanberger and other government thugs to abide by the Constitution and respect the Second Amendment.”
The Virginia law is similar to other “assault weapon” bans that typically define this category as basic. arbitrarily disliked weapon properties. The law criminalizes the production, import, sale, purchase or transfer of “firearm weapons”. definitions Includes semi-automatic centerfire rifles that accept detachable magazines and have any of five listed features: 1) a folding or adjustable stock, 2) a thumb hole stock or pistol grip, 3) a second grip or protruding grip that can be gripped by the non-triggering hand, 4) a grenade launcher, or 5) a threaded muzzle suppressor that can be used to attach a muzzle break, muzzle compensator, sound suppressor, or flash.
This definition covers some of the most popular firearms sold in the United States, including AR-15 style rifles. In January, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the gun industry’s trade association, reported Americans own more than 32 million “modern sporting rifles,” the preferred term for models covered by bans like Virginia’s.
Survey data suggests it’s somewhere in between 16 million And 25 million Americans have AR-15 style rifles. They often report using them for legal purposes such as self-defense, hunting and target shooting.
Such rifles are rarely used by criminals. “According to FBI statistics, rifles of all types were used in an average of 380 homicides in the decade from 2014 to 2023,” the FPC, the National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation said in their report. case. “Even if each of these murders were committed with an AR-15-style or other semi-automatic rifle, that would still mean that over 99.99% of the murders were killed.” Negative It was used in a murder in a particular year. Other items used much more frequently in homicides include guns (7,044 on average per year), knives (1,593) and personal weapons such as hands and feet (692).”
Although Virginia views prohibited rifle features as specifically suited to crime, they have legitimate functions. FPC and others note that collapsible and telescoping stocks, for example, “make it easier to carry long distances while hunting” and “allow for safe transport, including by hiking pack, ATV, or boat.” Notes. It also “increases the likelihood of successful home defense by allowing defensive tools to be stored safely in accessible areas and ensuring the rifle is maneuverable in confined spaces.” An adjustable stock “allows the firearm to better adapt to the individual shooter, thereby increasing the individual’s ability to use the firearm safely and effectively.”
Pistol grips “increase accuracy and reduce the risk of stray shots by stabilizing the gun”
“The AR-15 rifle’s straight-line design, in which the centerline of the barrel continues with the stock, is effectively required by a design feature that reduces muzzle rise resulting from firing the firearm,” the complaint reads. The ridged grips are “open hunting and sport shooting for those who challenge recoil.”
The flash suppressor “not only reduces the chances of a home-invading attacker detecting the location of his victim, but also protects the homeowner against momentary blindness when shooting in self-defense,” the lawsuit states. Flash suppressors also “increase accuracy in target shooting and hunting (especially at dawn).”
The complaint does not address grenade launchers, presumably because their inclusion in Virginia’s ban serves little practical purpose. Grenade launchers are definitely “destructive devices” So are hand grenades, according to the National Firearms Act.
The Virginia law also bans “large capacity” magazines, setting a 15-round limit. Like the “assault firearm” ban, this provision prohibits the common use of guns for lawful purposes. AR-15s are generally sold with magazines that can hold 30 rounds. Between 1990 and 2021 according to 2024 NSSF reportAmericans have purchased more than 400 million rifle magazines with a capacity of 30 or more rounds.
“According to the 2021 National Firearms Survey, 21.6% of firearm owners
The lawsuit states that approximately 18 million Americans own handgun magazines holding more than 15 rounds of ammunition. “The prevalence of these magazines should come as no surprise. Many popular handguns are sold with magazines that typically hold more than 15 rounds, and standard magazines for many popular rifles, including the most popular semi-automatic rifles in the country, similarly have a capacity of more than 15 rounds.”
The broad scope of Virginia law is constitutionally appropriate because the Supreme Court in question The Second Amendment applies to weapons “in common use” used “for lawful purposes such as self-defense.” The lawsuit states that “millions of peaceful people have determined that AR-15-style rifles” and other semi-automatic rifles covered by Virginia’s ban “are ideal for self-defense.”
The complaint suggests possible reasons for this choice: “Many AR-style firearms are chambered for 5.56x45mm NATO ammunition and also accept .223 Remington ammunition. These are relatively inexpensive and common cartridges; they are particularly well-suited for home defense purposes because they have adequate stopping power in the event of a home intrusion, but they quickly lose velocity after passing through a target and other objects, reducing the likelihood that an errant shot will hit an unintended target. Also Often important What is is that the modularity of the AR-15 platform and other platforms allows the individual user and owner to modify the firearm to the specifications that are safest and easiest for the owner to use, given the specific physical and environmental demands of self-defense.”
without regard From where Although people may prefer the guns that Virginia bans, the fact remains that millions of Americans use them for legal purposes. Equally, it is notable that banned rifles are not the weapons of choice for criminals (or even mass shooters), but this fact is clearly not constitutionally decisive. 2008 is the turning point District of Columbia v. HellerUltimately, the Supreme Court ruled that Americans had the right to own handguns, which it described as “the perfect self-defense weapon,” even though they stand out in homicide statistics.
heller The Court compared guns used in common for lawful purposes with “dangerous and unusual weapons,” which the Court said could be banned without violating the Second Amendment. But the weapons Virginia bans are “in all respects ordinary semiautomatic firearms,” the complaint states. “To the extent that they are different from other semiautomatic firearms, their distinctive features make them safer and easier to use. Whatever new gun category is created by state legislators, they cannot be banned because they are not dangerous and unusual.”
These weapons were developed by FPC et al. It states that “they are common in every respect: (1) they are categorically common because their functions and operations are semi-automatic; (2) they are characteristically common because they are popular weapon configurations (e.g., rifles) that all have varying barrel lengths and common features such as pistol grips; and (3) they are legal to own and use and common in jurisdictions in the vast majority of states, currently and throughout relevant history, for a wide variety of lawful purposes, such as self-defense, proficiency training, competition, recreation, hunting and gathering.”
Under the constitutional test set forth by the Supreme Court in the 2022 case. New York State Rifle and Pistol Association / BruenVirginia has the burden of showing that its ban is “consistent with this Nation’s historic tradition of firearm regulation.” The lawsuit states that the state “cannot put forward such a thing.” “heller And Bruen we already installed Only Historical practice of allowing a specific type of weapon to be banned; historical restrictions on dangerous and unusual weapons. However, according to this historical practice, to be banned, a branch must be both hazardous and hazardous. And unusual Commonly used weapons (such as firearms and magazines, which Virginia unequivocally prohibits)can’t Be extraordinary.”
The argument here McDonald/Katz It echoes the logic of other cases challenging “assault weapon” bans, including two recently filed by the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division in the District of Columbia and Colorado. While federal appeals courts have so far not been receptive to such arguments, there are signs that the Supreme Court may.
In addition to Judge Brett Kavanaugh, who serves as a D.C. Circuit judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals. dissident Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch from a 2011 decision upholding the District of Columbia’s “assault weapon” ban stated that they are interested in weighing the constitutionality of such laws. Since granting the petition requires the approval of four justices, this suggests that the Supreme Court may soon resolve this issue.
Post Federal Lawsuit Claims Virginia’s New ‘Assault Firearm’ Ban Is Blatantly Unconstitutional appeared for the first time reason.com.
