The Old Dominion’s ban on the sale of “assault firearms” will not be enforced until the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decides an upcoming case on a similar ban.

On Wednesday, Jeffrey L. Campbell of Virginia’s 28th Judicial Circuit issued a new stay that bars enforcement of the law until after SCOTUS rules in Viramontes v. Cook County in the National Rifle Association’s challenge to the ban. On Friday, US District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema issued a similar stay in the Second Amendment Foundation’s federal challenge to the ban. The Supreme Court case is almost certain to come down by next June.

“It is further ordered that the preliminary injunction previously entered by this court by Order dated July 7 2026 shall remain in full effect,” Judge Campbell wrote in Santolla v. Katz, “and the Firearms Ban and Magazine Ban are not enforceable, until further Order of this Court or no later 60 days after the U.S. Supreme Court issues a decision in Viramontes and Grant, whichever occurs.”

“[I]t is ordered that all deadlines and proceedings in this matter and are stayed pending the United States Supreme Court’s issuance of the mandates in Viramontes and Grant, or until further order of this Court,” Judge Brinkema wrote in McDonald v. Katz.

While there are still a number of other pending cases against Virginia’s sales ban, including one filed by the Department of Justice, the new stays bring at least momentary stability to the legal situation in the state. AR-15s have been back on many store shelves since Judge Campbell’s statewide injunction expanded to cover all law enforcement on July 21st. The stays make it increasingly likely, despite some lingering liability concerns, that sales in the state persist until SCOTUS rules on AR-15 bans–a decision most experts believe will go against the bans.

Still, the stays may not be the final say on the matter. It’s possible a higher court could undo Judge Campbell’s injunction. Attorney General Jay Jones (D.) has maintained the state will defend the ban’s constitutionality in state and federal court.

“We will continue to vigorously defend Virginia’s assault weapons ban and magazine capacity restrictions and uphold the laws designed to keep Virginians safe,” Jones said in a statement to The Reload late last month.

His office did not respond to a request for comment on the new stays. However, he has previously called on courts to stay the various suits against the law.

“The United States Supreme Court is reviewing challenges involving assault weapons bans that could directly inform these cases,” he told WSET last week. “Staying the four pending lawsuits will support the equal and fair application of the law and prevent conflicting outcomes.”

Virginia’s “assault firearms” ban primarily targets the sale, manufacture, and transfer of centerfire semi-automatic rifles capable of accepting detachable magazines that have one or more of a list of ergonomic or cosmetic features, such as pistol grips and telescoping stocks. While it applies to many rifles, shotguns, and handguns–even some Governor Abigail Spanberger wanted removed from the ban–the AR-15 is the most popular model it prohibits.

After Spanberger signed the ban into law following a party-line vote in the Virginia legislature, gun-rights activists flooded the courts with half a dozen Second Amendment challenges to it. Judge Campbell initially decided in June that the Virginia State Police and a handful of local prosecutors should not be able to enforce the ban while he oversaw one of the legal challenges over its constitutionality.

“Because the newly enacted Firearms Ban and Magazine Ban would likely run afoul of the protections of the Second Amendment with respect to the types of firearms and components the Plaintiffs possess as enunciated in both Heller and Bruen, I find that the Plaintiffs are likely to prevail on the merits of their claims,” he wrote in his first order in Santolla v. Katz.

On July 8th, after the law went into effect, he determined his original injunction was too limited. He observed that merely blocking the Virginia State Police and some local prosecutors did not offer the “complete relief” sought by the plaintiffs.

“[T]he Court now finds that to afford complete relief to the Plaintiffs herein, the injunction imposed by the Court’s prior ruling shall be extended to statewide application and enjoin all law enforcement agencies of the Commonwealth and its localities, to include law enforcement officers as defined in §9.1-101 of the Code of Virginia and Commonwealth Attorneys from enforcement of the provisions of the Bans within all localities and jurisdictions of the Commonwealth on the same terms and conditions as otherwise set forth in the Court’s prior letter opinion,” Judge Campbell wrote in his later order in Santolla v. Katz.

He gave an example showing how the narrow scope of the injunction could harm individuals, even within the county covered by the court’s jurisdiction. He pointed specifically to the law’s rules around transporting “assault firearms.”

“Should this Court’s prior ruling be limited only to party defendants herein, a person could freely transport an AR-15 through Washington County without fear of running afoul of the law,” he wrote. “However, if they crossed the county line into Grayson County then, arguably, they could be charged for the same since the coverage of the injunction would not extend therein. This Court has concerns about the treacherous patchwork of enforcement that this may lead to for the Plaintiffs and law enforcement alike and whether this ruling should be amplified to include, universally, all of the Commonwealth and law enforcement agencies within the same.”

He delayed the implementation of that expanded injunction until July 21st. The legal situation saw no significant developments in that time and, when the date arrived, many gun stores in the state began selling the impacted guns and magazines once again.

Gun-rights advocates and gun industry representatives alike agree that it is once again legal to do exactly that. The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the industry’s trade group, noted manufacturers and dealers are largely on the same page.

“Firearm manufacturers are shipping Modern Sporting Rifles and standard capacity magazines are again able to be lawfully sold at retailers in Virginia,” Mark Oliva, an NSSF spokesman, told The Reload last week. “This is a winning day for liberty in the Old Dominion. Judge Jeffrey Campbell’s injunction is in effect across the Commonwealth, and the unconstitutional law signed by Gov. Abigail Spanberger cannot be enforced.”

Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, had similar thoughts. However, he did note that not all gun dealers appear to be on the same page.

“We believe that gun stores can now legally sell both AWs and magazines that hold more than 15 rounds,” Van Cleave told The Reload last week. “Many stores are doing so, and a fewer number are waiting for the law to be formally struck down.”

As for SCOTUS, it is likely to hear oral arguments in Viramontes before the end of the year. However, it may not issue a ruling until the end of next June–as was the case in the two Second Amendment cases the Court decided last session.