...
By Dan Gooding
Associate News Editor
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday set up another major Second Amendment ruling that could have ripple effects across multiple states which have restrictions on semi-automatic weapons.
The cases—out of Chicago and Connecticut—test a core unresolved question in modern gun law: whether firearms like AR‑15‑style rifles are protected because they are widely owned for lawful purposes or can be banned because governments view them as especially dangerous.
The court said it would hear oral arguments during the fall. A ruling could affect assault‑weapons bans in roughly a dozen states and major cities, and either reinforce or significantly expand the Court’s recent trajectory on gun rights.
Read More on U.S.
“Connecticut’s assault weapon ban is lawful, lifesaving, and broadly supported. The gun lobby has flooded the courts in states across the country to get an assault weapons case up to this Supreme Court," Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said in a statement shared with Newsweek. "We are prepared for this fight, and we are going to go in with everything we’ve got to keep these weapons of war off our streets, out of our schools, and away from our families**."**
What the Cases Are About
The Illinois case centers on a Cook County ordinance that bans certain semiautomatic rifles, including AR‑15‑style weapons, and prohibits their possession, sale and transfer. Plaintiffs argue the law violates the Second Amendment because the weapons are in “common use” by Americans for lawful purposes, such as self‑defense.
County officials, meanwhile, defend the ban as a public‑safety measure aimed at reducing the risk of mass shootings and limiting access to high‑powered weapons.
The Connecticut case challenges a statewide assault‑weapons ban enacted after the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting. That law restricts possession of certain semiautomatic rifles unless they were owned before a 2013 cutoff and registered with the state and defines banned weapons by name and specific features.
State officials opposed the Supreme Court taking up the case, arguing that only a small fraction of the population owns semiautomatic weapons.
"More importantly, Petitioners’ evidence did not address the second question of why Americans choose to own assault weapons, much less show that Americans subjectively choose them for self-defense," their brief filed to the court read. "Nor did Petitioners submit any evidence showing these weapons are appropriate or ever used for self-defense in practice."
Related Story
Jackson Says SCOTUS ‘Protecting Guns’ Over Laws in Concealed Carry Ruling
Why the Supreme Court is Taking the Cases
The court’s decision to take the two cases comes after years of conflicting rulings in lower courts applying the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. That ruling required judges to evaluate gun restrictions based on whether they are consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
Since Bruen, federal appeals courts have split on how to apply that test to assault‑weapons bans. Some courts, including the Seventh and Second Circuits, have upheld such bans, while gun rights advocates argue those rulings misapply the Supreme Court’s framework and allow governments to prohibit weapons that are commonly owned.
The justices appear to have been watching the issue develop before stepping in. Both petitions were distributed for conference repeatedly over months, a sign the Court was weighing whether to take up the issue or wait for additional cases.
Now, by granting review and consolidating the cases, the Court is poised to issue what could be its most consequential Second Amendment ruling since Bruen—one that could determine whether bans on semiautomatic rifles remain legal nationwide.
States With Assault Weapons Bans
The ruling could have sweeping implications for state laws across the country, despite them not being included in the two specific cases.
Roughly a dozen states and the District of Columbia currently have some form of assault‑weapons restriction. These include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii's partial ban on assault pistols, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Washington, as well as Washington, D.C.
While the details vary significantly, most of these laws bar the sale, possession or transfer of certain semiautomatic firearms defined by features such as detachable magazines and military‑style characteristics. Some states include grandfather clauses for previously owned weapons, while others impose registration requirements or limits tied to magazine capacity.
The Supreme Court’s eventual decision could determine whether those types of bans—many of which have been in place for years or enacted after high‑profile shootings—can continue to be enforced nationwide.
...
Who Is Involved in the Cases
In Viramontes v. Cook County, the challengers include Cutberto Viramontes and other individuals, along with gun‑rights groups such as the Firearms Policy Coalition and the Second Amendment Foundation.
They are opposing Cook County, Illinois, and local officials including County Board President Toni Preckwinkle and State’s Attorney Kimberly Foxx.
"This is not the end of the fight to eliminate bans on so-called ‘assault weapons,’ but it marks the end of the beginning," FPC said in a statement Tuesday. "For years, the FPC Grassroots Army has fought hard to bring this question to the Supreme Court, and now the time has come to march forward and reclaim the rights that were immorally taken from us."
In Grant v. Higgins, the challengers include Eddie Grant Jr. and other individuals, supported by the Second Amendment Foundation and other advocacy organizations. They are suing Connecticut officials, including public safety leaders responsible for enforcing the state’s assault‑weapons law.
“The modern semi-automatic rifles banned in Cook County, Connecticut and elsewhere are among the most commonly owned firearms in the country, placing them well within the scope of the Second Amendment," SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut said Tuesday in a press release.
"The Second Amendment protects arms in common use for lawful purposes, and it’s hard to argue that a type of rifle that potentially outnumbers Ford F-150 trucks in America doesn’t meet that standard.”
What Happens Next
The cases are expected to be argued during the Court’s upcoming term, with a decision likely by June 2027.
A ruling could either uphold the ability of states to ban certain semiautomatic rifles or significantly expand Second Amendment protections—potentially invalidating assault‑weapons bans across multiple states.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines