The National Rifle Association announced a pair of lawsuits on Friday against Virginia’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” immediately after Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA) signed it into law, as the Supreme Court could weigh in on the legality of similar laws in other states in the near future.
The NRA announced two lawsuits, one in a state court and another in a federal court, to take aim at a pair of gun laws signed by Spanberger. The laws ban the sale and manufacturing of “assault weapons” and the sale of magazines with more than 15 rounds, respectively. Both lawsuits contend the newly enacted Virginia laws are clear violations of the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms.
“We made it clear that this extreme anti-gun proposal, which bans the new purchase of commonly owned firearms and standard capacity magazines in the Commonwealth, is a blatant violation of Second Amendment rights and an affront to landmark Supreme Court cases,” John Commerford, NRA-ILA Executive Director, said in a statement.
“Instead of listening to these factual concerns from their constituents, progressive politicians sided with Michael Bloomberg and his gun-grabbing groups,” he added. “The NRA will not sit idly by while progressive politicians strip the rights of law-abiding citizens, and our world-class legal team is locked, loaded, and ready to shoot down this outrageous gun-control law.”
The lawsuit in federal court claims the “assault weapons” ban would outlaw various types of popular firearms, including the AR-15, and would go beyond the permissible scope of regulation allowed by the Second Amendment.
“To be banned under this historical practice, an arm must be both dangerous and unusual,” the NRA argued in its lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. “Arms that are in common use—as the firearms and magazines Virginia has banned unquestionably are—cannot be unusual or dangerous. Therefore, they cannot be banned, and the Virginia laws challenged herein must be declared unconstitutional by a court competent to do so.”
Spanberger praised the pair of identical bills, which install the “assault weapons” ban effective July 1, in a statement released when she signed them into law.
“I am signing this bill into law because firearms designed to inflict maximum casualties do not belong on our streets. We are taking this step to protect families and support the law enforcement officers who work every day to keep our communities safe,” Spanberger said. “While the General Assembly chose not to adopt my amendment that specifically carves out certain firearms frequently used for hunting, I will work with the patrons to clarify this language.”
The new legal battle in the Old Dominion over its “assault weapons” and high-capacity magazine bans comes as the Supreme Court considers taking up the two issues in its upcoming term. The court is sitting on three petitions to hear cases challenging “assault weapons” bans and two cases challenging high-capacity magazine bans.
SUPREME COURT SITTING ON SEVERAL KEY SECOND AMENDMENT CASES
The three pending “assault weapons” ban petitions include National Association for Gun Rights v. Lamont and Grant v. Higgins, which both deal with a Connecticut law, and Viramontes v. Cook County, which deals with an Illinois law. The two challenges to high-capacity magazine bans include Duncan v. Bonta, which deals with a California law, and Gator’s Custom Guns v. Washington, which deals with a Washington state law.
All five cases were scheduled for discussion at Thursday’s closed-door Supreme Court conference, and decisions on whether the high court plans to take up any of the cases could come as early as Monday.