The U.S. Virgin Islands is currently embroiled in a lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice over some of its laws and practices surrounding gun ownership, and the territory's Attorney General's office has had a difficult time in keeping up with the deadlines imposed by the judge when it comes to filing responses.
After the USVI failed to respond to the government's motion for a preliminary injunction in a timely manner, the judge overseeing the case demanded the territory explain why it shouldn't be sanctioned for its tardiness. Amazingly, the AG's office asked for additional time to file that reply as well, declaring that the attorney working on the case was on vacation and out of pocket.
I would have turned them down flat, but the judge granted that request. Now the USVI has officially filed its response, but rather than justify its failure to comply with the court's deadlines, the AG's office chose to complain about how mean the head of DOJ's Second Amendment Section has been.
By way of pertinent background, the USA filed its Motion for Preliminary Injunction on June 10, 2026. On Friday, June 12, 2026, the Virgin Islands Legislature passed Bill No. 36-0144 (now Act No. 9113) by 13-2 vote. The undersigned provided the USA with a copy of the Bill on Monday, June 15, 2026. In significant part, USA Arrington in his response, prior to the mediation, to the passage of the new bill stated:
…. were the pending bill to become law, it would create additional constitutional violations. I will not burden this response with a detailed listing of the bill’s deficiencies, but those deficiencies include the bill’s (1) ban on arms in common use; (2) its overreaching sensitive place regulations; (3) its prohibition on carrying long guns; and (4) it’s requirement that firearms be kept in an inoperable state when not in use. One wonders if the Attorney General has even read Heller, which invalidated an identical regulation. A new law does not (indeed, in principle, cannot) remedy VIPD’s lawlessness. Such lawlessness requires a judicial remedy. USVI can continue to litigate, or it can negotiate in good faith. One way or the other, the United States will not stop until that remedy is in place. The United States will not withdraw its pending motion for injunctive relief even if the bill becomes law. It will merely add additional claims to that motion. Frankly, I am personally eager to test those claims in the Third Circuit.
This email generally reflects the tone of most of the USA’s communications with the GVI, as they are condescending, belittling and unprofessional. In full candor, undersigned is exhausted from the insults, innuendos, gamesmanship, and constant threats from the USA counsel.
I'm guessing that Barry Arrington is exhausted from the gamesmanship and unprofessionalism on the part of the USVI Attorney General's office, but I don't see his email as condescending, belittling, or unprofessional. He wasn't threatening the Attorney General. He was warning that the new law would not moot the DOJ's litigation, and in fact would create additional problems for the territory.
Lawmakers received a similar warning from Second Amendment Foundation's Kostas Moros and Virgin Islands Safe Gun Owners founder Kosei Ohno in their testimony opposing Bill No. 36-0144. Sadly, lawmakers ignored those warnings and adopted Bill No. 36-0144 anyway, and Gov. Albert Bryan signed the bill into law, hailing it as a step forward for the territory when he should have been well aware of the additional conflicts it would create with the Constitution.
Now the AG's office is trying to use the new law as their excuse for not complying with the judge's deadline to file a response to the DOJ's motion for an injunction.
Between June 12, 2026, the passage of Bill No. 36-0113, and June 24, 2026, the Governor’s signing of Act No. 9113 into law, the undersigned was restrained from making any representations (in briefing) or agreements (in mediation) which may have potentially conflicted with or exceeded the parameters of the pending law. The undersigned delay in filing a response to the Motion to Preliminary Injunction does not reflect disrespect toward the Court. The restraint exercised was in deference to and balanced by the GVI efforts to address outstanding Second Amendment concerns and right of the Virgin Islands to effect laws which conform with the U.S. Constitution.
At the very least, the USVI Attorney General could have filed a request with the court asking for an extension to the deadline to respond to the DOJ's motion for an injunction based on the ongoing actions by the territorial legislature. It failed to do so. Now the territory is arguing that its failure to abide by the court's deadline was an exercise in "restraint" on the part of the Attorney General, which is just absurd.
The U.S. Virgin Islands government continues to flagrantly violate the Second Amendment rights of both residents and visitors. That isn't reason to sanction the Attorney General's office, but its failure to offer up a legitimate or rational excuse for failing to comply with the judge's deadline most certainly is. If I were the territory's Attorney General I'd be embarrassed that this reply was sent out under my name, and if I were the judge overseeing the DOJ's lawsuit against the territory I'd be fed up with the territory's continued failure to take this lawsuit seriously.
Editor’s Note: The radical Left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.
Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member