Pro-gun groups warn that bans revert rights to the 19th century

Jack BirleSeptember 8, 2026

A group of pro-gun organizations argues that laws banning “assault weapons” aim to keep Second Amendment rights outdated, asserting at the upcoming Supreme Court oral arguments that such bans threaten modern firearm rights protected under the Constitution. The cases in question, Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins, challenge laws in Illinois and Connecticut that prohibit the sale of semiautomatic rifles like the AR-15. Advocates for the laws contend they are necessary for public safety,while the plaintiffs maintain that banning popular,modern firearms is unconstitutional and would regress Second Amendment protections by decades. The Supreme Court’s decision will influence similar laws across several states.

A coalition of pro-gun groups claims that state “assault weapons” bans try to keep Second Amendment rights stuck in the 19th century, submitting filings ahead of the Supreme Court’s December oral arguments weighing the legality of a pair of these sweeping bans.

The consolidated cases in Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins will deal with whether assault weapons bans, which typically outlaw the purchase of AR-15 and similar semiautomatic rifles, are constitutional under the Second and 14th amendments. The two cases are over laws in Cook County, Illinois, and Connecticut, but are similar to laws in various other states that will be affected by the high court’s eventual ruling. A brief filed to the Supreme Court arguing the laws are unconstitutional warns that broadly banning popular modern firearms, such as AR-15 style guns, would be incompatible with federal law and set Second Amendment rights back hundreds of years.