Key takeaways:
- The Supreme Court agreed to hear challenges to AR-15-style rifle bans in Connecticut and Cook County, Illinois, during its next term starting in October.
- Lower courts upheld both laws, with the 2nd Circuit calling AR-style rifles “dangerous and unusual” and consistent with historical firearm regulation.
- The challengers include gun rights groups and residents who argue the bans violate the Second Amendment and cover a rifle owned by tens of millions of Americans.
The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to decide whether the Second Amendment protects a right to own AR-15-style rifles, taking up challenges to bans in Connecticut and Cook County, Illinois, that could reshape how far governments may go in restricting semiautomatic firearms.
The justices will hear the combined cases during the court’s next term, which begins in October. The disputes mark the first time the high court will weigh the legality of laws limiting access to certain types of firearms, after previously declining to hear challenges to similar bans in Illinois and Maryland.
The cases center on weapons that gun violence prevention advocates describe as “assault weapons,” including AR-15s and other semiautomatic rifles. The rifles are popular among gun enthusiasts and have also been used in high-profile mass shootings. AR-15-style weapons were used in the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, where 20 children and six adults were killed, and in the 2022 shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, where 19 children and two teachers were killed.
Connecticut first adopted an assault weapons ban in 1993 and tightened its restrictions after Sandy Hook. The law makes it a crime to possess certain semiautomatic firearms, including AR-15-style rifles. State officials have said residents may still own a wide range of firearms, including many semiautomatic handguns, rifles and shotguns. Fourteen states and the District of Columbia restrict access to semiautomatic weapons.
Two groups of challengers, including the National Association for Gun Rights, the Second Amendment Foundation, the Connecticut Citizens Defense League and several Connecticut residents, argue the law violates the Second Amendment. The challengers say the Connecticut ban covers “the most popular rifle in the country,” one owned by tens of millions of Americans.
Federal district judges declined to block the Connecticut restrictions, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit upheld those decisions. The appeals court found the law consistent with the country’s historical tradition of firearms regulation under the test the Supreme Court announced in 2022. The 2nd Circuit described AR-style rifles as “dangerous and unusual” and “particularly suited for criminal violence,” while noting that Connecticut still permits residents to own “many popular weapons, including semiautomatic weapons deemed to be less dangerous by the legislature for self-defense and other lawful purposes.”
The Cook County ordinance, enacted nearly 20 years ago, bans the sale, transfer or possession of certain semiautomatic rifles, including the AR-15 and AK-47, as well as rifles that can accept magazines holding more than 10 rounds and have specified features. Violators face up to six months in prison and a minimum $5,000 fine.
That law was challenged by Cook County residents Cutberto Viramontes and Christopher Khaya, who want to own semiautomatic rifles, along with the Firearms Policy Coalition and the Second Amendment Foundation. A federal district court rejected the challenge, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit upheld the decision. During the litigation, Illinois passed its own statewide assault weapons ban, which the 7th Circuit also upheld.
The Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority has generally backed gun rights. In 2022, the court ruled for the first time that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a firearm outside the home for self-defense and set a framework requiring governments to show that gun restrictions are rooted in the nation’s history and tradition of firearms regulation.
When the court declined a similar case last year, four conservative justices indicated they believed AR-15 bans are unconstitutional. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote separately that “in my view, this court should and presumably will address the AR-15 issue soon.”
Earlier this month, the court ruled that occasional marijuana users cannot be barred from having firearms and struck down a Hawaii measure that generally prohibited concealed carry permit holders from bringing guns onto private property open to the public unless they had the owner’s permission.
Be First to Comment