Supreme Court Takes Up Major Semiautomatic Firearms Case

The Supreme Court accepted Second Amendment cases Tuesday involving a ban on modern semiautomatic firearms.

The justices granted writs of certiorari in Viramontes v. Cook County, Illinois and Grant v. Higgins, involving bans imposed by Cook County, Illinois, (which includes Chicago) and Connecticut, consolidating the cases for hearing in its term starting in October. Pro-Second Amendment organizations hailed the announcement.

“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,” Second Amendment Foundation Executive Director Adam Kraut said in a release. “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.”

“With cert granted, the case should be briefed over the Summer, with oral arguments in Fall and an opinion by the end of June 2027,” the Firearms Policy Coalition posted on X.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) praised the decision of the court to hear the case after what it called a “tortuous legal path.”

“NSSF, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, is elated over the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision today to hear petitions challenging state restrictions on the possession of Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs),” the organization said in a Tuesday release.

In an article published May 13, The New York Times noted that not only was the AR-15 a 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.

The high court on Thursday struck down Hawaii’s so-called “vampire rule” that pertained to carrying firearms on private property in a 6-3 ruling authored by Associate Justice Samuel Alito.

“This regime hobbles what the Second Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives,” Alito wrote. “We hold that the law is unconstitutional.”

The court on June 18 also pared back the applicability of a federal law prohibiting marijuana users from possessing firearms in Hemadi v. United States.

In the unanimous ruling upholding a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch took aim at arguments from the Department of Justice and anti-Second Amendment groups.

“The historical laws on which it relies targeted different kinds of people, did so for different reasons, and operated in different ways,” Gorsuch wrote about the “vampire” laws. “And faced with all these shortcomings in the government’s submission, we cannot say it has carried its conceded burden of showing its prosecution of Mr. Hemani complies with the Second Amendment.”

A ban on modern semiautomatic firearms passed in Virginia, the most recent state to do so, was blocked by preliminary injunctions. Lawmakers in one chamber of the Virginia Legislature voted to delay the law’s enactment following the rulings on Monday.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org