An eighth Virginia commonwealth's attorney has declared he will not enforce the state's new assault weapons ban, widening a revolt among local prosecutors that threatens to render the law dead on arrival when it takes effect July 1.
The growing list of refusals, first tallied by the Daily Caller, now spans rural and suburban counties alike. Each prosecutor has grounded the decision in the same basic argument: the ban violates Second Amendment protections the U.S. Supreme Court has already recognized. Governor Abigail Spanberger signed the legislation on May 15, 2026, but the ink was barely dry before the enforcement structure began crumbling from within.
Prosecutors in Spotsylvania, Smyth, Powhatan, and Pulaski counties are among those who have publicly announced non-enforcement, as the Washington Times reported. Their reasoning centers on two landmark Supreme Court rulings: District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), which affirmed an individual right to keep and bear arms, and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), which required gun regulations to be consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearms regulation.
Smyth County Commonwealth's Attorney Phillip Blevins Jr. laid out his position in blunt terms:
"After careful review of the legislation and existing Supreme Court precedent, I find the assault weapon ban signed by the Governor on May 15, 2026, unconstitutional and as a result, unenforceable."
Pulaski County Commonwealth's Attorney Justin L. Griffith framed the issue in more personal terms, pointing to the overnight criminalization of conduct that was legal the day before:
"I am not going to take law-abiding citizens as of June 30th, 2026, and criminalize that same behavior on July 1st, 2026, solely on the basis of this new law."
Griffith's statement cuts to a concern shared by gun owners across the commonwealth. Virginians who legally purchased and possessed semi-automatic firearms for years would face up to 12 months in jail and a $2,500 fine once the ban kicks in. The prosecutors refusing enforcement view that transformation of lawful gun owners into criminals as constitutionally intolerable.
This is not the first time Virginia's political leadership has collided with local resistance on firearms. When then-Governor Ralph Northam pushed gun control measures in 2020, a grassroots Second Amendment sanctuary movement swept through the state's counties. That movement had no single leader and no centralized organization, which made it nearly impossible for Richmond to contain.
As National Review observed at the time, commonwealth's attorneys in Norfolk and Portsmouth had already set a precedent by announcing they would not prosecute certain state laws. Democratic officials, in other words, had already normalized the very tool now being turned against a Democratic governor's signature legislation.
The parallel to how progressive prosecutors in other jurisdictions have declined to enforce drug laws and other statutes they consider unjust is hard to miss. Prosecutorial discretion runs in both directions. Virginia sheriffs and commonwealth's attorneys hold inherent authority over arrest and charging decisions that neither the governor nor the attorney general can fully override. One National Review commentator compared Northam's earlier miscalculation to a famous military blunder: "Ralph Northam is about to make the biggest tactical mistake in Virginia since Cornwallis decided to park his army at Yorktown."
Spanberger now faces a version of the same problem, with even stronger constitutional headwinds at her back.
The prosecutorial revolt is only one front. Gun retailers and Second Amendment organizations have already launched a legal blitz challenging the ban in court, arguing it cannot survive the historical-tradition test that Bruen demands.
Those challenges carry real weight. Virginia's own recent history shows that courts will strike down firearms restrictions that overreach. A federal court previously struck down a Virginia gun restriction as overly broad, a ruling that came from a bench not known for conservative leanings.
Investigators and legal analysts will need to determine whether the assault weapons ban can clear the Bruen threshold. The Supreme Court's 2022 framework requires the government to demonstrate that a modern regulation fits within the historical tradition of firearms regulation at the time of the founding or the Fourteenth Amendment's ratification. Broad bans on common semi-automatic rifles face a steep climb under that standard, and prosecutors across Virginia are betting the law cannot make it.
A criminal statute without willing prosecutors is a statute in name only. Even if state police or other agencies make arrests under the new ban, cases cannot proceed to trial without a commonwealth's attorney willing to prosecute. In the eight counties where prosecutors have publicly refused, gun owners effectively face no criminal exposure from the state law.
Authorities have not publicly confirmed whether the governor's office or the attorney general plans to intervene in counties where local prosecutors refuse to act. The attorney general could theoretically seek to bring cases directly, but that approach would be legally and politically fraught, requiring resources and raising questions about overriding elected local officials.
The practical reality mirrors what played out during the sanctuary movement six years ago. As National Review noted then, the governor and attorney general "can't police every decision by every officer to arrest or not, or by every prosecutor to bring a case or dismiss it, nor can they remove the discretion that must be a part of those jobs."
Other states pursuing aggressive gun restrictions are watching Virginia closely. New Jersey, for instance, has seen its own firearms regulations undercut by courtroom admissions that weakened the state's legal position. The pattern is becoming familiar: blue-state legislatures pass sweeping bans, and the enforcement machinery stalls.
With the July 1 effective date barely a month away, the number of prosecutors publicly breaking ranks continues to grow. Each new announcement raises the political cost for Spanberger's administration and strengthens the constitutional argument that the ban is unworkable. Earlier refusals from individual prosecutors in other Virginia counties drew attention, but the pace has accelerated.
Spotsylvania County's prosecutor was among the earliest to vow to block enforcement, and the movement has only gained momentum since. No prosecutor who joined the refusal has reversed course.
The question is no longer whether some Virginia prosecutors will resist the ban. The question is how many more will join before the law is supposed to take effect, and whether the courts will let it stand long enough to matter.
When eight elected prosecutors in a single state look at the same law and reach the same conclusion, the problem is not prosecutorial rebellion. The problem is the law.
