Virginia has a red flag law. It is called a Substantial Risk Order (SRO) and it took effect on July 1, 2020, when the General Assembly enacted Chapters...
Reviewed by Will Luker, Founder of CCW Hub. USCCA Training Counselor, USCCA Certified Instructor, NRA Certified Instructor, Law Enforcement.
Virginia has a red flag law. It is called a Substantial Risk Order (SRO) and it took effect on July 1, 2020, when the General Assembly enacted Chapters 887 and 888 of the 2020 Acts of Assembly (SB 240 / HB 674). The statutory framework lives at Va. Code 19.2-152.13 through 19.2-152.15 (Title 19.2, Chapter 9.2, "Substantial Risk Orders"), and the criminal prohibition on possession by a person subject to such an order sits at Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6.
Virginia's design is narrower than most other states'. Two features stand out: only an attorney for the Commonwealth or a law-enforcement officer can petition (not family members, household members, intimate partners, or healthcare providers), and a law-enforcement investigation is statutorily required before a petition can be filed. This combination routes every Virginia SRO through a prosecutor or a sworn officer who has already developed an evidentiary record.
This section explains how the order works, what triggers it, what surrender looks like in practice, what penalties attach to a violation, and how the Virginia SRO interacts with the federal firearm-prohibitor framework under 18 U.S.C. 922(g).
Va. Code 19.2-152.13(A) limits standing strictly:
No other category. Virginia rejected the broader family-member and household-member petitioner model used in some other states. A spouse, parent, sibling, roommate, ex-partner, therapist, school counselor, or coworker who is concerned about someone's access to firearms must take that concern to local police or to the Commonwealth's Attorney's office. The agency then decides whether to investigate and whether to petition.
This is a deliberate design choice. The statute states that "No petition shall be filed unless an independent investigation has been conducted by law enforcement that determines that grounds for the petition exist" (Va. Code 19.2-152.13(A)).
Virginia's SRO process runs in two stages.
Under Va. Code 19.2-152.13(A), the petitioner files a sworn petition supported by an affidavit (subsection B). The petition can be presented to a judge of a circuit court, general district court, or juvenile and domestic relations district court, or to a magistrate. The standard is probable cause that the person "poses a substantial risk of personal injury to himself or others in the near future by such person's possession or acquisition of a firearm."
The hearing is ex parte. The respondent is not present and has no notice. The order is issued and then served. In determining probable cause, the judge or magistrate "shall consider any relevant evidence, including any recent act of violence, force, or threat as defined in Va. Code 19.2-152.7:1."
The Emergency SRO:
The respondent may at any time file a motion with the circuit court to dissolve the order.
Under Va. Code 19.2-152.14(A), the circuit court for the jurisdiction that issued the emergency order must hold a hearing not later than 14 days after the emergency order's issuance. The respondent receives notice and may be represented by counsel.
The standard at the full hearing is clear and convincing evidence that the respondent "poses a substantial risk of personal injury to himself or to other individuals in the near future by such person's possession or acquisition of a firearm." The Commonwealth bears the burden of proving all material facts and is represented by the attorney for the Commonwealth for the jurisdiction.
If the court issues the full order:
If the court finds the person does not pose a substantial risk, any firearms previously relinquished under the emergency order must be returned in accordance with Va. Code 19.2-152.15.
Surrender is governed by Va. Code 19.2-152.13(C) and (G) and Va. Code 19.2-152.15.
At service of the emergency order, the respondent is given the opportunity to voluntarily relinquish firearms in his possession (Va. Code 19.2-152.13(C)). The serving law-enforcement agency takes custody of all relinquished firearms and prepares a written receipt containing the respondent's name and the manufacturer, model, condition, and serial number of each firearm. A copy of the receipt is given to the respondent. The agency makes a return to the circuit court accompanied by a written inventory of all firearms relinquished (subsection G).
Voluntary relinquishment is the front line, but a search warrant remains available. Va. Code 19.2-152.13(C) provides that nothing in that subsection precludes an officer from "later obtaining a search warrant for any firearms if the law-enforcement officer has reason to believe that the person who is subject to an emergency substantial risk order has not relinquished all firearms in his possession."
The receipt requirement is functional, not formal. A respondent should keep the receipt indefinitely. It is the document the law-enforcement agency uses to verify that the firearm being returned at the end of the order is the same firearm taken in, and Va. Code 19.2-152.15(A) requires presentation of a copy of that receipt as part of a return request.
Third-party transfer to a non-prohibited adult. Va. Code 19.2-152.14(D) allows the respondent (or his legal representative) to transfer any relinquished firearm to a different person 21 or older who is not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing the firearm, provided that: (1) the respondent and the transferee appear at the hearing; (2) the attorney for the Commonwealth advises the court that a law-enforcement agency has determined the transferee is not prohibited from possessing or transporting a firearm; (3) the transferee does not reside with the respondent; (4) the court informs the transferee of the requirements and penalties under Va. Code 18.2-308.2:1; and (5) the court approves the transfer. The agency holding the firearm delivers it to the transferee within five days of receiving a copy of the court's approval.
Return upon expiration or dissolution. Va. Code 19.2-152.15 governs return. Within five days of receiving a written request from the respondent and a copy of the receipt, the agency holding the firearm must return it, after confirming the respondent is no longer subject to any SRO and is not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing a firearm. If the firearm remains with the agency more than 120 days after the respondent is no longer subject to an order and no written return request has been submitted, the agency may dispose of the firearm under Va. Code 15.2-1721 (the general law-enforcement firearm-disposal statute). The same disposal route applies if the respondent provides written authorization for disposal.
The criminal penalty for being subject to an SRO and possessing a firearm anyway lives at Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6:
It is unlawful for any person who is subject to an emergency substantial risk order or a substantial risk order entered pursuant to Va. Code 19.2-152.13 or 19.2-152.14 ... to purchase, possess, or transport any firearm while the order is in effect. Any such person with a concealed handgun permit is prohibited from carrying any concealed firearm while the order is in effect and shall surrender his permit to the court entering the order ... A violation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor.
A Class 1 misdemeanor in Virginia carries up to 12 months in jail and a fine of up to $2,500 (Va. Code 18.2-11).
Two features of Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6 deserve emphasis:
Out-of-state ERPOs are covered. The statute applies not only to a Virginia SRO but also to "an order issued by a tribunal of another state, the United States or any of its territories, possessions, or commonwealths, or the District of Columbia pursuant to a statute that is substantially similar to Va. Code 19.2-152.13 or 19.2-152.14." A person subject to a substantially similar out-of-state extreme risk protection order remains prohibited from purchasing, possessing, or transporting a firearm in Virginia.
Mandatory CHP surrender. A respondent with a Virginia CHP must surrender the permit to the court entering the order. This is independent of any decision about firearm relinquishment.
The statute does not itself create a felony penalty for transferring a firearm to an SRO respondent. That exposure is at Va. Code 18.2-308.2:1, which makes it a Class 4 felony to sell, barter, give, or furnish a firearm to a person the transferor knows is prohibited from possessing it under Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6 (among other prohibitors listed in that section). A Class 4 felony carries 2 to 10 years and a fine of up to $100,000 (Va. Code 18.2-10). This is the statute the court advises a Va. Code 19.2-152.14(D) transferee about at the hearing.
A Virginia SRO is not by itself one of the federal prohibiting categories under 18 U.S.C. 922(g). There is no federal "subject to a state ERPO" prohibitor in the current statutory list. A respondent subject only to a Virginia SRO with no other disqualifying history is prohibited under state law from purchasing, possessing, or transporting a firearm while the order is in effect, and the order is entered into VCIN (which transmits to the federal NICS database and blocks any dealer transfer), but a federal 18 U.S.C. 922(g) charge would not lie on the SRO alone.
The adjacent federal prohibitor most often confused with an SRO is 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8), the qualifying-protective-order prohibitor. That federal prohibitor requires:
A full Virginia SRO is issued after notice and a hearing. But the SRO is grounded in self/other risk, not in an intimate-partner relationship; it does not require a credible-threat finding directed at an intimate partner, and it does not include the explicit-use-of-force prohibition that 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8) demands. The two regimes do different work. A Virginia respondent who has both an SRO and a qualifying protective order can face both the federal 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8) prohibitor (from the protective order, not the SRO) and the state Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6 prohibitor.
A current Virginia CHP holder who learns that a Substantial Risk Order has been or is about to be served has three immediate priorities.
Do not contest service. The emergency order is ex parte; the officer serving it is not the decisionmaker, and obstructing service is its own separate exposure. The proper forum is the motion to dissolve (available immediately) and the full hearing within 14 days, with counsel.
Relinquish voluntarily and obtain the receipt. Possession after service of the emergency order is a Class 1 misdemeanor under Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6. Voluntary relinquishment is the way to keep the surrendered firearms inside the return-to-owner pipeline of Va. Code 19.2-152.15. A firearm seized under a later search warrant is harder to retrieve and more likely to be charged as direct evidence of a possession offense.
Surrender the CHP to the issuing court. The statute is mandatory: the respondent "shall surrender his permit to the court entering the order." Possession of the permit during the order's duration combined with any carry conduct creates straightforward Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6 exposure.
Instructors who teach CHP applicants in Virginia should disclose that an active SRO is a disqualifier under Va. Code 18.2-308.09, which expressly lists ineligibility under Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6 among the bars to a permit, and that the SRO is entered into VCIN and transmitted to NICS, so any attempted firearm purchase during the order's duration will result in a NICS denial.
The Department of State Police maintains VCIN, the system of record into which SRO entries are made under Va. Code 19.2-152.13(F). Annual filing volume has been the subject of news coverage and academic study but is not consistently published in a single official report. Practitioners should consult the most recent Virginia State Police data when seeking a current count and should not rely on initial-year (2020-2021) numbers, which were low because of localized prosecutor unfamiliarity and pandemic-era court delays.
Virginia's SRO law has drawn criticism from both directions.
Civil-liberties advocates and Second Amendment organizations argue that the ex parte emergency order, issued on probable cause without notice and without an opportunity for the respondent to be heard, raises due-process concerns. That critique applies to all state ERPO statutes; federal courts have generally upheld these schemes against facial challenges where the post-deprivation hearing is prompt and the standard at the full hearing is sufficiently demanding.
Gun-violence-prevention advocates argue, conversely, that Virginia's petitioner restriction makes the SRO useful only when a prosecutor's office or a local police department has been notified, has the capacity to investigate, and chooses to file. In jurisdictions where the prosecutor's office has been reluctant to invoke the statute, the practical effect has been near non-use, producing uneven filing rates across the state.
A practitioner advising a Virginia client should treat the petitioner restriction as the dominant operational variable. The question is not "is there a red flag law" (yes) but "does the local Commonwealth's Attorney's office and police department actually use it" (uneven, jurisdiction by jurisdiction).
The SRO is not several adjacent things that students and instructors sometimes conflate it with.
| Item | Rule |
|---|---|
| Authorizing statute | Va. Code 19.2-152.13 through 19.2-152.15 |
| Criminal prohibition | Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6 (Class 1 misdemeanor) |
| Effective date | July 1, 2020 (2020 Acts of Assembly, Chapters 887 and 888) |
| Who may petition | Attorney for the Commonwealth or law-enforcement officer only |
| Family-member petition | Not authorized |
| Pre-petition investigation | Statutorily required |
| Emergency standard | Probable cause (ex parte) |
| Emergency duration | 14 days |
| Full-hearing standard | Clear and convincing evidence |
| Full-order duration | Up to 180 days, extensions of up to 180 days each, no statutory cap |
| Firearm surrender | Voluntary at service; search warrant available if incomplete |
| Third-party transfer | Permitted to non-resident, non-prohibited adult 21+, with court approval |
| Return on expiration | Within 5 days of written request and receipt presentation |
| Disposal | After 120 days post-expiration if no return request (Va. Code 15.2-1721) |
| CHP surrender | Mandatory (Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6) |
| Out-of-state ERPO | Substantially similar orders covered by Va. Code 18.2-308.1:6 |
| Federal 18 U.S.C. 922(g) implication | Not a standalone federal prohibitor; VCIN entry denies NICS-checked transfers |
For the full disqualification picture (felonies, protective orders, mental-health adjudications) that operates alongside the SRO, see RESTRICTIONS. For the CHP application disqualifiers that flow from an active SRO, see APPLICATION_PROCESS. For the protective-order firearm prohibitor under Va. Code 18.2-308.1:4, see RESTRICTIONS.
United States v. Rahimi (2024). In United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the federal firearm prohibition at 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8) for persons subject to a qualifying domestic-violence restraining order, holding the federal disability survives the historical-tradition test of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022). Rahimi is the controlling Supreme Court authority on the constitutionality of federal firearm disabilities tied to domestic-violence findings. It bears on any state-level red flag analysis to the extent those frameworks borrow federal 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8) prohibitor mechanics.
This page covers one part of our Virginia concealed carry guide.
Read the complete Virginia guideBrowse local instructors offering state-approved training in your area. Book online, complete your training, and get one step closer to your concealed carry permit.