Supreme Court To Hear Challenges to Semi-Auto Gun Bans

By Harold Hutchison

Challenges to bans on modern semiautomatic firearms are being heard by the Supreme Court.

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) on Friday filed its opening brief in Cutberto Viramontes, et al. v. Cook County, Illinois, et al., a lawsuit seeking to invalidate a local ban on so-called “assault weapons” imposed by the county that includes Chicago in 2006. The brief, citing the popularity of AR-15-style rifles, argues that courts that upheld  bans on modern semiautomatic firearms failed to properly apply the Supreme Court’s Heller and Bruen cases, which upheld Second Amendment rights to bear arms.

“Since Heller, the Court has continued to make clear that firearms are arms under the plain text of the Second Amendment,” the brief states. “In Bruen, for instance, the Court explained that the Second Amendment’s text covers all ‘instruments that facilitate armed self-defense,’ regardless of when they were invented.” (RELATED: Firearms Companies Ask Supreme Court To Toss Suit Over Shooting)

“Anti-gun states, relying on circuit courts that are hostile to the Second Amendment, have long gotten away with unserious arguments in AWB cases,” said SAF Director of Legal Research and Education Konstadinos Moros. “That tactic was always only going to work until the Supreme Court finally decided to take on the issue itself. That time has come, and our opening brief lays out the arguments that we believe will be adopted by the Court in its ruling.”

Today SAF and its partners filed a landmark opening brief before the Supreme Court on our two combined cases challenging the constitutionality of Assault Weapons Bans. The two cases, Viramontes and Grant stand to massively reshape the Second Amendment landscape and SAF is… pic.twitter.com/Rw6whr1SSk

— SAF (@2AFDN) August 28, 2026

The justices granted writs of certiorari in Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins — a challenge to Connecticut’s ban pn semi-automatics — on June 30, consolidating the cases prior to hearing oral arguments once the next term of the Supreme Court begins in October. The high court’s decision to accept the petition came less than a week after it struck down Hawaii’s so-called “vampire rule” regarding carrying firearms on private property in a 6-3 ruling authored by Associate Justice Samuel Alito.

The New York Times noted in a May 13 article that, not only was the AR-15 a very popular rifle, but that modern semiautomatic firearms bearing a superficial resemblance to the AK-47 were previously “ubiquitous” before the AR-15’s ascendance among the general public. Under the Supreme Court’s rulings in Heller and Bruen, firearms in common use for lawful purposes fall under the Second Amendment’s protection.

“Assault weapons bans represent one of the largest and most pernicious gun rights issues facing Americans,” SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut said in a Friday release announcing the brief had been filed. “The Second Amendment demands that it is ‘the People’ who get to choose what firearm is best suited to their lawful needs, not an ideologue legislator.”

“Modern semi-automatic rifles are the overwhelming choice of Americans for all sorts of reasons – they are easy to shoot, mechanically accurate, modular and ergonomically adaptable,” Kraut continued. “As a result, Americans from all walks of life choose these firearms to defend their families and their homes. Our brief today lays out exactly why politicians who hide behind their own armed security do not have the authority to ban these firearms.”

Weeks after the Supreme Court took up the Viramontes case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a ruling declaring New Jersey’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” and so-called “large-capacity magazines” holding more than 10 rounds violated the Second Amendment rights of residents.

“Applying the framework announced in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, we agree with the District Court that New Jersey’s ban on Colt AR-15s violates the Second Amendment,” the Third Circuit said in its opinion — written by Circuit Judge Arianna Freeman, an appointee of former President Joe Biden — in Cheeseman v. New Jersey Attorney General. “However, because the record supports the same result for all semi-automatic rifles—not only Colt AR-15s—we will MODIFY the District Court’s order so that it deems the Assault Firearm Provisions unconstitutional with respect to the full class of semi-automatic rifles. We will AFFIRM that part of the order as modified.” (RELATED: Pro-Second Amendment Groups Go After Trump Admin In Court)

“The [large-capacity magazine] Provisions also violate the Second Amendment, so we will REVERSE the District Court’s order with respect to those,” the Third Circuit continued, creating a “circuit split” due to its ruling conflicting with appellate circuits that upheld similar bans.