FINALLY: Supreme Court Grants Cert in Two ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Cases

The percolation has finally come to an end. After years of dodging the issue, the Supreme Court announced today — the last day of its 2025/2026 session — that it will hear two “assault weapon” ban cases next term. SCOTUS will consolidate Viramontes v. Cook County, a Seventh Circuit (Illinois) case and Grant v. Higgins from the Second Circuit (Connecticut).

That means the Court will finally decide the constitutionality of banning America’s favorite rifle, along with other commonly owned and used firearms that politicians and the civilian disarmament industrial complex have tendentiously branded as weapons of war as justification for outlawing them.

This is a moment that the gun rights community has been waiting for since Bruen was handed down in 2022. Last year, when the Court refused to hear two other hardware cases, Justice Brett Kavanaugh made a point of writing that the denial didn’t mean the Court agreed with lower courts upholding the bans . . .

I would not wait to decide whether the government can ban the most popular rifle in America. That question is of critical importance to tens of millions of law-abiding AR–15 owners throughout the country. We have avoided deciding it for a full decade. And, further percolation is of little value when lower courts in the jurisdictions that ban AR–15s appear bent on distorting this Court’s Second Amendment precedents.

Exactly. And during all of the subsequent percolation, five more states have enacted “assault weapons” bans, bringing the total to 12 plus the District of Columbia. So it is now long past time for the Court to settle the matter once and for all.

Meanwhile, cases concerning magazine capacity limits are still bubbling away as the Court took no action on those cert petitions. And the court denied cert in a few age restriction cases where the gun rights of adults aged 18 to 20 are limited. This, even though there’s a circuit court split on the issue (note that there is no split re “assault weapons”…every circuit court that’s ruled has upheld them). It seems the Court only has enough bandwidth for one big 2A case next term. At least for now.

Here’s the Second Amendment Foundation cheering the news . . .

The U.S. Supreme Court has granted two of the Second Amendment Foundation’s (SAF) petitions for a writ certiorari in both Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins, the organization’s challenges to the bans on so-called “assault weapons” in Illinois and Connecticut.

Originally filed in 2021, Viramontes challenges Cook County’s ban on many commonly owned modern guns, which was the precursor for the nearly identical statewide ban passed by the Illinois legislature. In Grant, SAF is challenging Connecticut’s ban on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles – both by name and by feature set. After a troubling and misguided preliminary injunction decision from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, SAF presented the case to the Supreme Court for consideration. 

“The Supreme Court’s decision to hear these pivotal cases will finally provide the courts the necessary guidance as it relates to the types of arms protected by the Second Amendment,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “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. 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.”

SAF is joined in Viramontes by the Firearms Policy Coalition and two private citizens, and is joined in Grant by the Connecticut Citizens Defense League and three private citizens.

“Lawmakers have long relied on fearmongering to pass laws that infringe on the Second Amendment, especially when it comes to common, semi-automatic rifles,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “We’re hopeful the Court will finally put to rest the idea that these rifles are not covered by the Second Amendment simply because of their look and features. These arms are no different than other semi-automatic firearms millions of Americans own for self-defense, and we look forward to restoring the right to keep and bear arms for countless citizens through these cases.”

Look for the Court to hear arguments in the fall and, given their past practice, they’ll announce their ruling late in the 26/27 session, probably close to a year from now.