Hate ads?! Subscribe for just $5 a month!

pew report black

Hate ads?! Subscribe for just $5 a month!

SAF THROWS SUPPORT BEHIND FORMER VIRGINIA AG’S ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN CHALLENGE

Listen to Article

The Second Amendment Foundation’s decision to back former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s challenge to the state’s so-called “assault weapons” ban is more than just another court filing—it’s a calculated strike at the heart of the incrementalist strategy that gun-control advocates have relied on for years. By lending its litigation muscle and donor network to a case that directly confronts Virginia’s post-2020 restrictions, SAF is signaling that it intends to treat every new ban as an opportunity to force courts to confront the historical and textual weaknesses in the “common use” test that lower courts have twisted since Heller and Bruen. Cuccinelli’s involvement adds political weight: a former top law-enforcement official arguing that these firearms are in common use for lawful purposes undercuts the narrative that only “military” weapons need regulating.

For the broader 2A community the move is both encouraging and instructive. It demonstrates that even in a state where Democrats control the legislature, sustained legal pressure can keep restrictions from hardening into settled law. More importantly, it keeps the focus on original public meaning rather than policy preferences—an approach that has already produced wins in other circuits and could generate persuasive precedent if the case reaches the Supreme Court. Donors and activists should watch how SAF structures its arguments; every brief filed now is effectively a dry run for the next round of nationwide challenges once the current composition of the federal bench begins hearing Second Amendment cases in earnest.

The larger implication is that the battlefield has shifted from Richmond to the courtroom, and the side that controls the narrative about what “in common use” actually means will shape the next decade of gun policy. SAF’s involvement ensures that narrative will be written by litigators who treat the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental liberty rather than a grudging concession, giving the community both a tactical victory and a strategic template for future fights.

Share this story