Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones on Tuesday joined attorneys general from 21 other states and the District of Columbia in opposing a proposed U.S. Postal Service rule that would allow certain firearms to be sent through the mail.
In a comment letter, the coalition said the proposal conflicts with a 1927 federal law that has long restricted the mailing of concealable firearms. The states said the executive branch lacks authority to stop enforcing that law and direct the Postal Service to change its regulations.
The dispute followed a January 2026 opinion from the U.S. Department of Justice under President Donald Trump’s administration, which concluded the mailing restriction is unconstitutional. The Justice Department said it would no longer enforce the law. On April 2, the Postal Service published a proposed rule to conform with that guidance.
Jones said the change could weaken Virginia’s gun laws. “This loophole puts guns in the hands of those barred by Virginia law from buying weapons, and it allows people to blatantly dodge background checks and access illegal firearms,” Jones said in a statement. “The federal government continues to undermine the law and (is) putting our communities at risk in the process.”
In their letter, the attorneys general said the statute remains valid because no court has struck it down. They argued the rule could allow firearms to be shipped without going through licensed dealers, bypassing background checks and increasing access for people barred from possessing guns under state law, including felons and domestic abusers.
The states also said the change could make gun tracing more difficult and force state and local agencies to develop new tracking systems. They added that the Second Amendment does not require the Postal Service to carry firearms because the law regulates mailing, not possession.
Virginia joined a coalition led by New Jersey, New York, and Delaware. Other signers were Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia.
The proposal remained in the rulemaking process, and it was unclear whether the Postal Service would revise it in response to the objections.