BREAKING: GOA & VCDL Sue Virginia Over Assault Weapon & Mag Ban

Added: 2026-05-15

[00:00:00]All right, y'all. We knew it was going to be a big day, and we're adding to the news. We got a massive development out of Virginia that every gun owner in America needs to pay attention to because this is no longer just another anti-gun proposal floating around a committee room. We now have, like I said in the previous video this morning, the governor Abigail Spamberger has signed the assault weapon ban mag ban into law.

[00:00:25]So now the lawsuits are coming forward.

[00:00:27]I told you this morning about the first one that filed last night which was NRA, SAF and FPC. Second one just dropped now and it's what I want to tell you about.

[00:00:37]And this one is different. It's taking a different attack, a different route at freedom and liberty than the previous mentioned one. And I know that there's another one coming from Har Dylan and crew. So stay tuned.

[00:00:50]So again, Virginia's brand new so-called assault weapon ban is being attacked before it ever takes effect. And the lawsuit here is an absolute scorched earth constitutional argument. What makes this one different is that the plaintiffs here are not bringing this under the federal second amendment.

[00:01:08]They're going directly after this law under article 1, section 13 of the Virginia constitution. And they're using Breuan, Heler, Raheem, Katano, and even recent Supreme Court language about AR-15s being among the most popular rifles in America. You can see what's happening, guys and gals. It's coming to a head in this country, and it's coming quick. This lawsuit was just filed by all of my friends over Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, the Virginia Citizens Defense League, the Virginia Citizens Defense Foundation, and my friend Firearms Journalist John Crump against the Virginia State Police Superintendent Colonel Jeffrey Katz. And if you think this is just about AR-15s, you really need to hear what this law actually bans. So today, we're going to break down what Virginia just passed, why this lawsuit says the law is unconstitutional, the massive implications for AR-15s and standard capacity magazines, the insane feature definitions buried in the bill, and why this case could become one of the most important Second Amendment lawsuits in the country, especially for the year. If you're new here, my name is Jared. This is Guns and Gadgets, your premier source for Second Amendment news. Let's get into it. Virginia Democrats passed SB749 and according to this lawsuit, it creates one of the broadest so-called assault firearms bans in the nation. The law criminalizes the importation, sale, manufacture, purchase, transfer, and even public carry of massive categories of semi-automatic firearms and magazines beginning July 1st, 2026. Now, listen carefully to how broad this thing is.

[00:02:45]According to the lawsuit, Virginia's definition of assault firearm includes semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines and common features like adjustable stocks, pistol grips, threaded barrels, or forward grips.

[00:02:57]Semi-automatic pistols with threaded barrels, braces, barrel shrouds, or magazines outside of the grip.

[00:03:04]Semi-automatic shotguns with detachable magazines or pistol grips. Shotguns with revolving cylinders. Any firearm capable of accepting beltfed ammunition. and even firearms modified to become one of these categories, folks. That's enormous. That means that your ordinary AR-15 banned. Your AR pistol potentially banned. Uh your threaded barrel handgun potentially banned. Your standard 17 round Glock magazine for your Glock 17 banned under their large capacity feeding device definition. And yes, Virginia defines large capacity as anything over 15 rounds. I wonder if they're going to take it away from the law enforcement agencies, too. Oh, yeah.

[00:03:45]Second class right thing. U So, what the anti-gunners call common sense regulation here is actually criminalizing some of the most commonly owned firearm and magazines in the entire country, the United States of America. And the lawsuit absolutely hammers that point. The plaintiffs cite Supreme Court precedent saying that AR-15s are the most popular rifle in the country. And that's not just GOA saying it. That's language pulled directly from the uh from a unanimous Supreme Court opinion that was uh Mexico versus Smith and Wesson that case. And that lawsuit also points out that magazines over 15 rounds number in the hundreds of millions nationwide. And this is where Breuan and Heler become devastating for Virginia because under Heler, firearms that are in common use for lawful purposes are protected arms. And Breuan made clear that the government has to prove a historical tradition. supporting modern gun restrictions. And that lawsuit flat out says Virginia cannot do that. Now, here's where this gets even more interesting. The plaintiffs are strategically avoiding federal Second Amendment claims entirely. It's a different path than the lawsuit I told you about this morning. Instead, they're arguing that Virginia's own constitution protects these firearms. And that matters because state constitutional protections can sometimes provide even stronger protections than the federal courts.

[00:05:11]And the lawsuit points out that Virginia amended its constitution in 1971 specifically to clarify that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That's the quote. The filing argues Virginiaians intended that language to be at least as protective as the Second Amendment itself. Now, let's talk about one of the most dangerous parts of the law, the public carry ban. This law doesn't just ban future purchases. It bans carrying these firearms in public. And according to the complaint, Virginiaians could be criminally charged for carrying these firearms on public streets, sidewalks, parks, rights of way, and basically any place open to the public. And that includes private businesses open to the public. So theoretically, you could carry legally for years and then suddenly become a criminal because Virginia politicians changed the definition. And the lawsuit points out there's no meaningful exemption even for concealed handgun permit holders. And that's a direct collision course with Breuan. A Bruin specifically held there is no historical tradition supporting bans on carrying commonly used firearms for self-defense. Now, the lawsuit also attacks this law for vagueness.

[00:06:31]And honestly, some of the definitions are ridiculous. For example, the law bans grips that protrude conspicuously.

[00:06:39]What the hell is a conspicuously protruding grip? Who decides that? A state trooper, a prosecutor, a jury? The lawsuit argues ordinary Virginiaians cannot reasonably determine what's legal and what isn't. And then there's the infamous barrel shroud language language that we've been seeing since the Clinton uh assault weapon ban. The plaintiffs actually point out that depending on interpretation, even ordinary handgun frame designs could potentially qualify as prohibited shrouds. Now, this is exactly what happens when lawmakers who don't understand firearms try to sound smart and try to regulate them using cosmetic features and scary terminology.

[00:07:25]And remember, this is the same playbook that we have seen for decades. And it gets rather old, but here it is again.

[00:07:32]This time in Virginia again.

[00:07:35]They don't ban firearms based on function. They target the appearance.

[00:07:39]threaded barrels, pistol grips, adjustable stocks, braces, features that have little or nothing to do with criminal misuse. Meanwhile, criminals ignore all of it and they're not held responsible at all. Now, the complaint also walks through specific firearms and magazines affected. And this part is important because it establishes standing. The lawsuit explains how John Crump specifically wants to acquire firearms like a Daniel Defense DDM4 V7 AR-15. I got one right right there for you, bud. Uh, a Kel-Tech PR57, uh, Glock mags, AR mags, Benelli shotguns, AR pistols with braces, even beltfed systems for testing and review purposes. Now, the filing repeatedly emphasizes these are ordinary firearms in common lawful use. And folks, this is key. The lawsuit argues the right to keep and bear arms necessarily includes the right to acquire them. And this is an argument we're seeing gain more and more traction nationwide after Breuan.

[00:08:42]Because a right you cannot exercise is not really a right. If the government can stop the sale, transfer, manufacturer, or acquisition of protected arms, then they can effectively destroy the right itself without technically banning possession of anything. And that's why these future sales bans are so dangerous now. And they were the they were like the the cool chick at a party for about 15 years because every state was trying to do it.

[00:09:06]But Brewan caught their hand in a cookie jar. Now Virginia used to be one of the strongest proun states in the country.

[00:09:14]But after demographic shifts and Democrat control expanded, and I'll be honest with you, some people couldn't bring theelves to vote for a woman of color who was already proven herself to be a staunch second amendment uh supporter and was already number two in charge in Virginia. But because people couldn't do that for whatever reason, here we are. Richmond politicians started pushing California style gun control immediately. And now they've gone allin. This lawsuit specifically says the state is banning the most popular firearms and magazines in the nation. That's not hyperbole. AR platform rifles are owned by tens and tens of millions of Americans. Standard capacity magazines over 15 rounds are factory standard for countless firearms.

[00:10:03]It's mainstream ownership. It's common use. And under Heler, common use matters enormously. In fact, Heler made it crystal clear that entire classes of commonly owned firearms cannot be simply banned. Now, could this case eventually reach the Supreme Court? It's possible.

[00:10:21]Anything is is possible here when you're dealing with gun gun grabbers. In fact, it's pro it's absolutely possible this will go to the Supreme Court, especially if Virginia courts reject the Bruin framework or uphold these bans despite the overwhelming common use evidence.

[00:10:36]Now, there's another angle here as well.

[00:10:38]This case could influence ongoing assault weapon litigation nationwide because courts around the country are currently split on AR bans and magazine bans because some lower courts have upheld them while others have struck them down. And eventually the Supreme Court is going to have to get off their little booties and actually do some work and uh and take care of this and settle it once and for all. Again, I've said this in the previous video, but if you didn't see it, I think the Constitution and the Second Amendment, as was written originally, basically says that this ban is unconstitutional anyway. So, these are not banned illegal items. They're all lawful anyway and always have been.

[00:11:15]The question becomes, can the government ban the most commonly owned rifle platform in America while pretending it's somehow unusual or outside the constitutional protections? And that argument becomes harder and harder to sustain each and every single year for them. And this lawsuit knows it. Why?

[00:11:34]That's why the filing repeatedly emphasizes popularity, common ownership, lawful use, and Supreme Court language recognizing these firearms as protected arms. Now, before I wrap this up for y'all, understand something very important. This is not just about Virginia because anti-gun politicians everywhere watch each other. There's everybody in in in in the the viewing audience right now that lives in one of these states. They're saying, "Hey, Jared, what about my state?" I feel for you. We're fighting for all of you. It just takes time. I hate that it takes this much time because the Supreme Court doesn't have a set and their backbone is questionable. Not all of the justices, but you know, a good seven of them. But if Virginia gets away with this, other blue states will push even harder. And if Virginia loses badly, it strengthens challenges everywhere else. That's why this case matters nationally. And folks, I'll tell you this right now. The anti-gunners have a massive problem after the Brewan case. For years, they relied on balancing tests, interest balancing, public safety arguments, emotional appeals, and activist judges who were willing to rubber stamp all of the restrictions. But Breuan changed the game. Now they have to prove historical analoges. And there is no historical tradition in America of banning the most common rifles and magazines owned by the people. That's the battlefield now. And this Virginia lawsuit goes directly for the throat on that argument. We're going to watch this case very closely here on this channel because this could become one of the defining Second Amendment fights for the next several years. Let me know what you think down below. Do you believe Virginia's new ban survives brewing or do you think this eventually gets crushed in court? I just might take some of my items and drive 12 minutes north of my house and show them the border with Tennessee and Virginia just to see how they like it. If you enjoy this video and you want real Second Amendment reporting without any corporate media spin, make sure you subscribe and hit the bell notification.

[00:13:33]I appreciate all of you. And as always, thank you to the groups that are fighting the fight in this case, GOA, GOF, VCDL, VCDF, and John Crump for being the plaintiffs. In the previous one this morning, the Second Amendment Foundation, FPC, NRA, thank you for everybody who's donating to these groups regularly. I feel it, too. Like sometimes I just can't keep spending money on things. But you know what? I'm going to I'm not going to eat pals tomorrow morning for breakfast and I'll send some more money to the groups who are doing the thing and I ask you to do the same. Stay safe, stay armed, and stay free. I'll see you in the next one.

[00:14:10]Take care.