On January 27, Shawn Fleetwood published an article in The Federalist. Entitled “SCOTUS Holds The Key To Stopping Virginia Democrats’ Gun Control Gambit. Will They Use It?”
When Democrats locked up a trifecta in Virginia in early January, the writing was on the wall for every gun owner and Second Amendment advocate in the Old Dominion. Gun-grabbers in the Senate and House of Delegates have been champing at the bit since Republican Glenn Youngkin succeeded anti-gun Democrat Ralph Northam as governor in 2022.
Abigail Spanberger worked with Moms Demand Action before she entered politics in 2018. Now that she has moved into the Executive Mansion, lawmakers are eager to get back to violating the constitutional rights of their fellow Virginians.
On Monday, January 26, the Senate Courts of Justice Committee advanced multiple 2A-related bills.
The Federalist article focuses on Senate Bill 749, a new assault firearm 1/large-capacity magazine ban introduced by District 37’s Senator, Saddam Azlan Salim.
S.B. 749 is a portmanteau bill. It includes bans and other restrictions on semiautomatic firearms. This includes rifles, pistols, and shotguns, as well as limits on magazine capacities. 2
In Fleetwood’s article, my friend Cam Edwards noted S.B. 749 differs from more mainstream bills of this kind. While any of the banned guns possessed on or before July 1, 2026, are grandfathered in, non-compliant magazines are not. S.B. 749 is a confiscatory ban similar to Rhode Island’s prohibition (See Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island).
I should mention Cam has some skin in this particular game: He’s a gun owner in Virginia.
As the title suggests, the Supreme Court could shut down a Virginia ban. In fact, it could shut down every ban, including California’s, which dates back to 1989. It could also shut down magazine-capacity limitations; maybe even rule magazines are parts, not accessories.
Reinforcing Bruen and toning back Rahimi, the Supreme Court could rule that acceptable analogies should be at least similar in scope and purpose and drawn from the Founding period or the years around the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment. We’re talking statewide prohibitions on entire classes of firearms.
The court could render a truly significant decision on whether or not young American adults, ages 18-20, enjoy the same civil liberties as other adults 21 or older. The ridiculous limitation didn’t even come into play at the federal level until 1968 and still applies only to transfers made by federally licensed retailers.
Males 18 years of age and older have been obliged to perform armed militia service for more than 233 years. There was never any limitation on the type of weapon they might be ordered to use aside from their required musket.
Yes, the Supreme Court can do all of this. Shawn Fleetwood and the Federalist pose the all-important question: Will they?
That’s a very good question.
In a December 2025 press release, the Department of Justice noted: “The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that the Second Amendment is not ‘a second-class right.’ And over the past two decades, the Supreme Court has recognized that the Second Amendment is a fundamental, individual constitutional right and has taken multiple opportunities to strengthen Second Amendment protections for ordinary, law-abiding citizens.”
Yet the court seems to be one of the worst offenders. For years, the court has ignored or sidestepped hundreds of cases, some of which have spent years in litigation and have wide-ranging impacts.
In other cases, the court has simply kicked the can down the road with a GVR3, meaning the case has to go through the entire district-appellate court process again. The circuit spends years on this rerun and usually delivers the same decision that got the case sent back in the first place.
Every year, the Supreme Court gets far more requests than it can handle. This was why Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1925, giving the court sole control over the selection of cases to be heard.
Considering there are usually multiple cases involving any constitutional issue, the Supreme Court has the power to combine the cases and limit them to a specific topic, such as gun rights for young adults, weapon bans, restoration of Second Amendment rights for felons, or dropping the marijuana prohibition.
In this way, the court could hear 2-3 cases per term while doing the country a huge favor by answering questions that impact lives every day.
Of course, if these delays and deferrals really are due to the court wanting to dodge uncomfortable cases, all bets are off, and we’ll have to persuade Congress to pass a new law either limiting the court’s discretion or creating a new court that handles issues of Bill of Rights-related constitutionality.
Notes:
1Virginia doesn’t call them assault weapons; it calls them assault firearms. Perhaps to avoid confusing guns with rocks, tire irons, fists, or any of the myriad other weapons used in assaults. In Virginia law, “‘assault firearm’ means any semi-automatic center-fire rifle or pistol which expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material and is equipped at the time of the offense with a magazine which will hold more than 20 rounds of ammunition or designed by the manufacturer to accommodate a silencer or equipped with a folding stock.” (Virginia Code §18.2-308.2:2)
2S.B. 749 would reduce magazine capacities from 20 to ten rounds.
3A single action that Grants certiorari; Vacates the prior ruling; and Remands the case back to the district.
About Bill Cawthon
Bill Cawthon first became a gun owner 55 years ago. He has been an active advocate for Americans’ civil liberties for more than a decade. He is the information director for the Second Amendment Society of Texas.
I find this all quite distressing. If I wanted to live in a Yankee-regulated state I would be living in a Yankee-regulated state. SCOTUS is unlikely to provide remedies in the short term. The lying, ignorant, proselytizing anti-gunners are going to swamp the Virginia legislature with their misinformation and they will bulldoze anyone speaking with pro-gun facts and sensibilities. “Are you a *good* witch or are you a *bad* witch?”