On December 16, Harmeet Dhillon’s Civil Rights Division of the Division of Justice filed the complaint in U.S. v. Authorities of Virgin Islands within the District Courtroom of the Virgin Islands. The lawsuit was filed “to revive the Second Modification rights of law-abiding residents” beneath 34 U.S.C. § 12601, which authorizes the Legal professional Normal to sue a governmental authority partaking in a sample or apply that deprives individuals of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Structure or legal guidelines of the US.
Underneath Virgin Islands (“VI”) law, possessing or carrying an unlicensed firearm is an offense subjecting a person to a time period of “imprisonment of not lower than ten years,” and/or a fantastic “not lower than $10,000 nor greater than $15,000.”
However to acquire a license to own and carry a firearm, an individual should “set up[] to the satisfaction of the Commissioner [of the Police Department] that he has good motive to worry dying or nice damage to his individual or property, or … every other correct motive for carrying a firearm, and the circumstances of the case, established by affidavit of the applicant and of not less than two credible individuals, exhibit the necessity for such license.”
There is no principled distinction between that and the New York legislation that the Supreme Courtroom in Bruen discovered to infringe on the Second Modification: the applicant should show “correct trigger,” that means “a particular want for self-protection distinguishable from that of the overall group,” i.e., proof “of explicit threats, assaults or different extraordinary hazard to private security.”
Because the VI criticism additional alleges, an applicant for a license will need to have “good ethical character” with out articulating any normal therefor, and a license could also be denied to “any one who for justifiable causes is deemed to be an improper individual by the Commissioner” or if a “correct motive exists to disclaim such utility,” with out specifying any normal. A separate license should be obtained for every particular firearm, which should be inspected yearly by the police.
In contrast, the shall-issue licensing regimes accredited in footnote 9 of Bruen “seem to include solely ‘slim, goal, and particular requirements’ guiding licensing officers, … moderately than requiring the ‘appraisal of info, the train of judgment, and the formation of an opinion,’ … —options that typify proper-cause requirements like New York’s.”
With none authorized authority, the VI Police Division requires the applicant to put in a secure that’s completely bolted to the house’s wall or ground the place a licensed firearm is to be saved. Every applicant will need to have his or her personal secure even when they share a house with one other applicant (as within the case of married {couples}). Earlier than a license is issued, a house inspection is required, which takes a number of months to a yr to schedule and full.
Once more, as Bruen‘s footnote 9 states: “as a result of any allowing scheme may be put towards abusive ends, we don’t rule out constitutional challenges to shall-issue regimes the place, for instance, prolonged wait instances in processing license purposes or exorbitant charges deny extraordinary residents their proper to public carry.” And naturally the Virgin Islands nonetheless has a may-issue regime, information of the Bruen determination having apparently been ship-wrecked on its journey there.
However the standard suspect nanny states on the mainland did get the Bruen determination and have taken each measure to hinder it. The current article by Mark W. Smith, “Licenses Delayed, Rights Denied: How Up to date Firearm Carry Licensing Regimes Proceed to Violate the Second Modification,” Harvard JLPP (Fall 2025), summarizes the state of affairs as follows:
jurisdictions hostile to gun rights have responded not with compliance, however with refined resistance. In these states, the correct acknowledged in Bruen exists on paper however stays largely inaccessible in apply. These states have remodeled federalism’s promise of experimentation into what can solely be described as laboratories in denying constitutional rights. The instruments are facially impartial—processing instances, coaching necessities, documentation requirements—however their cumulative impact is something however. When examined systematically, these measures reveal a deliberate technique of administrative nullification that courts have been sluggish to acknowledge and even slower to treatment.
The Virgin Islands are hardly a tropical paradise the place nobody actually wants a gun for self-defense. Murder, theft, and drug trafficking are endemic. Data from the Virgin Islands Police Division describe “violent crime statistics exceeding nationwide averages and creating severe issues for the territory’s 87,146 residents. The murder charge within the US Virgin Islands continued to surpass that of mainland United States and even main cities like Chicago, establishing the territory as one of the vital harmful areas beneath US jurisdiction.”
The Virgin Islands shouldn’t be the one jurisdiction being focused by the Civil Rights Division. In September, the Division of Justice’s Civil Rights Division sued the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Division “as a consequence of their sample or apply of infringing the Second Modification rights of law-abiding residents in search of hid carry weapons (CCW) permits.”
