Justice Department Sues the Virgin Islands Police Department for Unconstitutional Practices Resulting in Effective Denials of Gun Permits

The Virgin Islands Police Department (VIPD) is the main law‑enforcement agency for the U.S. Virgin Islands. It has jurisdiction throughout the territory and is responsible for policing, investigations, and enforcing territorial laws. VIPD is an executive‑branch agency of the Government of the U.S. Virgin Islands; it is led by a Police Commissioner who is appointed by, and reports to, the Governor of the U.S. Virgin Islands, subject to territorial law.

A “proper cause” regulation is a rule that requires someone who wants a license to carry a concealed handgun in public to show a special, individualized need for self‑defense that is greater than the general public’s (for example, documented threats), and gives licensing officials discretion to deny permits if they think the applicant hasn’t shown such a need.

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), the U.S. Supreme Court held that New York’s proper‑cause requirement for an unrestricted public‑carry license violated the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. The Court said governments may still require objective conditions (like background checks or training), but they cannot condition public‑carry rights on a discretionary showing of “proper cause” or “special need.” After Bruen, laws and policies that function like New York’s proper‑cause rule are presumptively unconstitutional.

The Civil Rights Division’s Second Amendment Section (also called the Second Amendment Rights Section) is a specialized unit within the U.S. Department of Justice that focuses on enforcing the Second Amendment as a civil right.

According to DOJ, the Section:

• Investigates alleged “patterns or practices” by law‑enforcement agencies or other government actors that systematically infringe Second Amendment rights.
• Brings civil lawsuits (like the case against VIPD) and files statements of interest in other cases where federal Second Amendment interests are at stake.

It was created in late 2025 after the administration issued Executive Order 14206 directing the Attorney General to identify and remedy ongoing infringements of Second Amendment rights. DOJ and news reporting describe the Section as a way to centralize and strengthen federal enforcement of gun‑rights violations by state, local, and territorial authorities.

The Police Pattern or Practice Act, codified at 34 U.S.C. § 12601, makes it unlawful for a governmental authority (or its agents) to engage in a “pattern or practice” of conduct by law‑enforcement officers, or by officials responsible for juvenile justice or juvenile incarceration, that deprives people of rights protected by the U.S. Constitution or federal law.

If the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe such a pattern or practice exists, § 12601 authorizes the Department of Justice to file a civil lawsuit in federal court to obtain “appropriate equitable and declaratory relief to eliminate the pattern or practice.” In practice, that typically means:

• Court declarations that the defendants violated the law or Constitution.
• Injunctions requiring specific reforms to policies, training, supervision, data systems, and oversight.
• Court‑enforceable consent decrees or settlement agreements, sometimes overseen by an independent monitor.

The statute does not authorize DOJ to seek money damages for individuals; it is aimed at structural remedies that change how an agency operates going forward.

Executive Order 14206, titled “Protecting Second Amendment Rights,” was signed on February 7, 2025. It declares that the right to keep and bear arms “must not be infringed” and directs the Attorney General to:

• Review all relevant orders, regulations, guidance, plans, international agreements, and other executive‑branch actions (especially from 2021–2025) to identify any ongoing infringements of Second Amendment rights.
• Develop and implement a plan of action to protect those rights, including reassessing agency rules, enforcement policies, and the federal government’s positions in litigation involving firearms.

In the VIPD case, DOJ cites Executive Order 14206 as part of the authority and policy backdrop for its enforcement strategy: the order explicitly instructs DOJ to root out and correct government practices that infringe law‑abiding citizens’ Second Amendment rights. The creation of the Second Amendment Section and its lawsuit against VIPD are concrete steps DOJ is taking under that directive.

According to the federal complaint and DOJ summaries, the Justice Department is asking the court to:

1. Declare that the Virgin Islands and VIPD are violating the Second Amendment and 34 U.S.C. § 12601 by:

   • Imposing unreasonable delays in deciding gun‑permit applications.
   • Enforcing a “proper cause” standard similar to the one struck down in Bruen.
   • Requiring extra‑statutory conditions (such as bolted‑in gun safes and intrusive home inspections) before issuing permits.

2. Permanently enjoin (block) VIPD and territorial officials from:

   • Continuing to enforce the “proper cause” requirement and other challenged policies and practices.
   • Conditioning permits on unreasonable searches or storage requirements that go beyond what the law authorizes.

3. Require structural reforms so the permitting system complies with the Constitution, including:

   • Clear, lawful written policies and procedures.
   • Timely processing and decision deadlines for applications.
   • Training, supervision, and record‑keeping sufficient to prevent future violations.

4. Grant any additional equitable and declaratory relief the court deems appropriate, which could include ongoing court oversight or a consent decree.

The complaint does not seek money damages; it seeks court‑ordered changes to how VIPD and the territory run their firearms licensing system.

Residents who believe they faced unconstitutional delays or conditions in getting a gun permit can submit complaints to DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, specifically to the Second Amendment Section.

How to submit:

• Go to DOJ’s Second Amendment Section page (justice.gov/crt/second-amendment-section) and use the online complaint portal linked there; or
• Use the general Civil Rights Division complaint process (online form, mail, fax, or phone) described on DOJ’s “Filing a Complaint” page.

What happens after submission:

• Civil Rights Division staff review the complaint to determine whether it falls within their authority and whether it suggests an individual violation, a broader “pattern or practice,” or no actionable issue.
• They may contact the complainant for more information or documents.
• Complaints can be used to open or support investigations and lawsuits like the VIPD case, or be referred to other DOJ components or agencies if more appropriate.
• Filing a complaint does not make DOJ your personal lawyer and does not guarantee an individual remedy, but it is the official channel for reporting potential civil‑rights violations related to firearms permitting.

The lawsuit is directed at the Virgin Islands’ gun‑permitting system and practices, not at revoking existing valid permits.

The complaint and DOJ press materials focus on:

• Stopping unconstitutional delays, the “proper cause” rule, and extra conditions that effectively block people from obtaining permits.
• Forcing VIPD and the territory to adopt a permitting system that complies with Bruen and the Second Amendment going forward.

They do not ask the court to cancel lawfully issued permits. If DOJ prevails, existing permit holders are more likely to see burdensome or unconstitutional conditions (such as “proper cause”‑based restrictions or intrusive inspections) limited or removed, rather than losing their permits. The exact effect on current permits will depend on the court’s final order or any settlement, but all available documents indicate the primary impact will be to change current and future permitting practices, not to strip people of permits they already have.