Spanberger’s latest ‘gun-grabbing nonsense’ prompts action from Trump DOJ: ‘Stay tuned!’
Spanberger's Latest 'Gun-Grabbing Nonsense' Sparks DOJ Response: 'Stay Tuned!'
Spanberger s latest gun grabbing nonsense - A prominent Justice Department prosecutor recently addressed growing concerns from a Virginia resident and a fellow Trump administration official about alleged delays in background check processing following a judge’s temporary halt to a sweeping "assault weapons" ban. The controversy intensified as Richmond became the most recent Democratic-led capital to implement new restrictions on Second Amendment-related activities, drawing sharp criticism from conservatives and gun rights advocates. The Supreme Court’s recent decisions against New York and the District of Columbia’s gun laws have already bolstered conservative legal arguments, but this case has added a new layer to the debate over gun control measures.
The Virginia law in question, signed by Governor Jennifer Spanberger, imposes criminal penalties for the sale or purchase of "assault firearms." Critics argue this law represents an overreach, targeting weapons that are not necessarily the most dangerous. The legal battle has taken on particular significance because the ban was temporarily blocked by a judge in Lancaster County, a GOP-friendly area of Virginia’s Northern Neck. This ruling granted a key plaintiff, a Kilmarnock-based gun dealer, the legal standing to challenge the law, as the inclusion of the store in the case highlights the potential impact on local gun sales.
Supporters of the ban, including state officials, claim it is a necessary step to curb gun violence. However, accusations of intentional delays by the Virginia State Police have emerged, suggesting the agency is slowing background checks to effectively enforce the law while it is under litigation. These claims have drawn attention from the Department of Justice, with Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon vowing to investigate the situation. In a statement, she labeled the controversy as "gun-grabbing nonsense nationally," emphasizing her office’s commitment to addressing such issues.
Virginia Gun Sales Surge Ahead of July 1 Ban
Despite the legal hurdles, gun sales in Virginia have seen a notable increase in the weeks leading up to the July 1 implementation date of the new law. This surge has been attributed to consumers rushing to complete purchases before the ban takes effect. The Virginia State Police, responsible for processing these checks, has faced scrutiny over its handling of the surge in demand. Col. Jeffrey Katz, a Spanberger appointee and defendant in the Lancaster case, has been at the center of the controversy, with critics accusing him of working in tandem with the law to restrict firearm access.
Andrew Ferguson, FTC commissioner and a vocal opponent of the law, reported encountering a significant backlog in background checks after visiting his local gun store. He described the delay as "en masse" and argued it was a deliberate effort to undermine the Second Amendment. "The Virginia State Police is delaying background checks en masse in one of the most flagrant violations of our rights that I've seen. This is outrageous," Ferguson said in a tweet. He further accused the agency of assisting "radical leftists" in disarming Americans, framing the delays as part of a broader strategy to enforce the law without public input.
"Our police are aiding radical leftists to disarm Americans," Ferguson said.
In response, the Virginia State Police defended its actions, stating that there was no intentional slowdown and that the system was managing the increased workload. Matthew Demlein, an ombudsman for the state police, noted that the Firearms Transaction Center processed over 100,000 transactions in June alone and averaged more than 5,000 daily. "The [center] is working diligently to complete each transaction," Demlein said, countering the allegations of deliberate obstruction.
Legal Challenges and Historical Context
Philip Van Cleave, a co-plaintiff in the case and leader of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, expressed skepticism about the claim of intentional delays. "I don’t want to be unfair to the Virginia State Police," he tweeted. "I’m not convinced that the delays are intentional." Van Cleave also pointed to a provision in the Code of Virginia that allows firearm transfers to proceed even if background checks are delayed. If a dealer meets the requirements set by the Virginia State Police but police do not respond within five business days, the sale can still be completed without violating the law.
Van Cleave further highlighted historical context, referencing a commission established by Democratic former Governor Tim Kaine after the Virginia Tech massacre. The commission concluded that magazine capacity limits, a key component of the new law, would have "made no difference in the outcome" of the tragedy. This finding has been used by critics to argue that the law is not grounded in practical gun safety measures but is instead a political tool to limit access to firearms.
The Supreme Court’s recent rulings against New York and the District of Columbia have provided conservatives with a legal framework to challenge such measures, but the Virginia case has exposed ongoing tensions. The judge’s temporary block on the law cited the lack of rational basis for the ban’s firearm characteristics, as handguns—arguably the most common weapons used in crimes—were excluded despite fitting the lawmakers’ military-style rationale. This decision has fueled debates over whether the law is being applied consistently or if it serves as a pretext for broader gun restrictions.
DOJ’s Role and Future Actions
Fox News Digital sought clarification from the DOJ on the actions being taken or planned in response to Ferguson’s allegations. The agency has yet to release a detailed statement, but the involvement of Harmeet Dhillon signals a potential federal interest in the case. Dhillon’s office has also taken on other instances of what she calls "gun-grabbing nonsense," suggesting a broader focus on state-level gun laws. As the case moves forward, the DOJ’s stance could influence the outcome of the legal battle and set a precedent for similar measures across the country.
The legal and political ramifications of the Virginia law are far-reaching, with implications for both state and federal gun policies. As the dispute continues, stakeholders remain divided. While some see the law as a necessary step to reduce gun violence, others argue it represents an overreach that stifles constitutional rights. The upcoming rulings and DOJ actions will be critical in determining the law’s viability and the future of gun control in Virginia.
With the temporary block in place and the state police defending its procedures, the situation remains fluid. The outcome of this case could shape the trajectory of gun-related legislation in the coming months, particularly as the DOJ weighs its response to the allegations. For now, the phrase "stay tuned" has become a recurring theme, underscoring the anticipation for further developments in the legal and political arena.