In a ruling issued Thursday, the Spotsylvania Circuit Court denied a request for preliminary injunction in the Curtis v. Katz challenge to Virginia’s semiautomatic firearm/magazine ban. Article 1, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution recognizes an individual right to arms as members of the unorganized militia, plaintiffs argued, and “the rifles and handguns prohibited by the Firearms Ban are ‘quintessential Militia Arms.”
Despite those inarguable conclusions, Judge William E. Glover is allowing the ban to proceed.
True, he concedes, Plaintiffs will suffer “irreparable harm if the Ban becomes effective and is later determined to be unconstitutional.” But considering a “balance of hardships to the parties… it does not outweigh the potential of harm to the Commonwealth.” does not
And he does not concede the Court can make a finding that “a legally viable claim… will… succeed on the merits.” Just the opposite.
“The Court is currently persuaded that both the history and practice surrounding Sec. 13 establish no individual right to possess military style weapons by members of the unorganized militia,” Glover states.
“The public is entitled to the implementation of laws” created by the representatives and approved by the Governor, Glover concludes. If the ban is struck down later, “the balance between the legislature judiciary is maintained [but] to enjoin the legislature preliminarily is not… in the public interest.”
This correspondent has been invited to attend a Zoom meeting conducted by the Counsel of Record on Friday afternoon and plans to submit relevant observations in an update to this article.
The Court’s opinion is embedded below.
Virginia Gun Ban Lawsuit Argues Banned Arms Are Militia Arms
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.
The judge used interest balancing to rule, something they are supposedly not allowed to do. He said the law was passed for public safety, and that outweighs the recognized harm to citizens. Yet again, woke judges rewriting the Constitution and ignoring scotus.