Eight Virginia prosecutors now refuse to enforce Spanberger's assault weapons ban

The bottom line

Eight Virginia prosecutors have now publicly refused to enforce SB 749, the state’s new assault weapons ban, calling it unconstitutional on its face. When the sheriffs and the prosecutors both walk away from a law, that law is dead in the water regardless of what Abigail Spanberger signs.

---

This article is based on analysis from Bearing Freedom. Watch the original video. This is commentary, not legal advice.

---

The revolt is real and it’s growing

Virginia’s gun owners have been watching something remarkable unfold in the weeks since Governor Abigail Spanberger signed SB 749. The revolt against her assault weapons ban isn’t coming from ordinary citizens — it’s coming from the Commonwealth attorneys the state would need to actually prosecute anyone under it.

Six refused. Then seven. Now eight. Each announcement comes with a letter to the local sheriff laying out the same argument: this law is incompatible with the Second Amendment, and my office won’t enforce it.

The most recent letter I’ve seen reads, in part: “I write to inform you that my office will not prosecute any charges brought solely under SB 749. This new law, effective July 1st, 2026, imposes criminal penalties on a number of commonly owned firearms and magazines. I cannot in good conscience devote the resources of this office to enforcing laws that burden the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”

That’s a Commonwealth attorney putting it in writing, formally, with no hedging. Not a statement to the press. A letter to his sheriff.

What happens when the sheriff agrees

The raw count of prosecutors matters, but the more significant development is this: in at least one jurisdiction, the prosecutor and the sheriff reached the same conclusion and announced it together.

If a sheriff won’t arrest anyone under SB 749, the law is already dead in that county — you can’t charge someone who was never brought in. But if the sheriff does make an arrest and the prosecutor drops it, the law still goes nowhere. When both agree upfront that enforcement is off the table, the entire process from investigation to conviction is broken before it starts.

One of those prosecutors said it plainly: “The sheriff and I are in total agreement that we will not enforce the assault weapons ban and assault weapons carry bans just signed into law because we believe they’re unconstitutional on their face.”

He also noted that he first swore an oath to the Constitution when he enlisted in the Marine Corps at 18. He’s not breaking that oath because Abigail Spanberger told him to.

The constitutional problem she can’t paper over

Heller established that the Second Amendment protects firearms in common use for lawful purposes. Bruen held that any regulation must be consistent with the historical tradition of firearm regulation in this country. Virginia’s SB 749 bans AR-15s, the most common rifle in America, with tens of millions in civilian hands used for completely lawful purposes.

There is no historical analogue for banning an entire category of ordinary, widely owned rifles. Spanberger’s legal team would need to produce one to survive Bruen scrutiny, and they can’t. The prosecutors citing this aren’t making a novel argument — they’re reading the same opinions courts across the country have used to strike down similar bans.

Here’s what I find telling: Spanberger herself tried to propose amendments after the bill passed to carve out some modern sporting rifles. The amendments got defeated, but the fact that she tried them concedes the problem. She understood the breadth of the ban was constitutionally indefensible. Her own legislature wouldn’t let her fix it, so now she owns the whole thing.

A law only works if someone enforces it

I think people sometimes forget how basic this is. A law has no physical force on its own. It works because people with institutional authority — police, prosecutors, courts — agree to apply it in sequence. Take the prosecutor out of that chain and the law stops functioning. It becomes a statement of legislative preference that goes nowhere.

Spanberger can sign whatever she wants. If the Commonwealth attorneys won’t charge anyone, she has no mechanism to turn that signature into consequences. She could have banned every firearm in the state and it would make no difference in any county where the prosecutor has said no.

That’s where she is right now. Eight prosecutors covering significant portions of Virginia have opted out, and the number is still moving.

Where this is headed

A month ago this was six prosecutors, and most of the coverage framed them as outliers in deep-red rural Virginia. Now there’s a prosecutor-sheriff team acting in formal coordination. The letters are getting more precise and the commitments more explicit.

I’ve followed Virginia gun politics long enough to have expected more from the Spanberger administration here. They were organized and effective at passing SB 749. They have been completely flat-footed in dealing with what came after. Richmond is in genuine meltdown over this, and it shows.

The law takes effect July 1st. More prosecutors will probably announce before then. When you’re at eight and climbing, this isn’t a fringe resistance anymore — it’s a governing reality across a big chunk of the state.

For Virginia gun owners, know your county and know who your Commonwealth attorney is. The court challenges to SB 749 are moving simultaneously, and a federal ruling will eventually resolve the constitutional question. But right now, the prosecutors who took their oaths seriously are providing real cover to real people whose only offense is owning guns that were legal six months ago.

Spanberger lit a match and she’s watching the kindling catch.