U.S. Supreme Court to Weigh In on State Bans of Assault-Style Rifles in New Gun Rights Test
By Andrew Chung
WASHINGTON, June 30 (Reuters) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear a challenge to state-level bans on assault-style rifles, giving the conservative-leaning bench another opportunity to broaden firearm rights in a case centered on weapons frequently linked to mass shootings.
The justices took up two appeals after lower courts upheld restrictions in Cook County, Illinois, and Connecticut that prohibit powerful semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15. Those courts rejected arguments that the bans violate the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The high court is expected to hear the case during its next term, which begins in October.
The dispute arrives amid deep national divisions over how to address gun violence, including a steady drumbeat of mass shootings. With a 6-3 conservative supermajority, the Supreme Court has repeatedly taken an expansive view of the Second Amendment in recent years, often striking down gun restrictions that don't align with the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.
Challengers of the state and local bans argue that assault-style rifles and large-capacity magazines are commonly owned firearms, and that prohibiting them defies the court's precedents protecting weapons in common use. Supporters of the bans counter that these weapons are designed for military-style combat and have no legitimate civilian purpose, pointing to their outsized role in high-casualty public shootings.
This case is the latest in a string of major gun-rights rulings. Earlier this month, on June 26, the court struck down a Hawaii law that restricted carrying handguns on private property open to the public without the owner’s permission. On June 18, it limited the application of a decades-old federal law that bars firearm possession by certain drug users, narrowing a measure that had threatened the gun rights of millions of Americans who use marijuana and own firearms.
The outcome of the new case could have sweeping implications. If the court rules broadly, it might invalidate similar assault-weapon bans in states like California, New York, and Maryland, and restrict the ability of other jurisdictions to enact such measures. The decision is likely to further fuel the debate over gun control in a country where nearly half of all households own firearms.
The court’s rulings in 2008 and 2010 established an individual right to own guns for self-defense, and its 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen set a new standard requiring gun laws to be consistent with historical tradition. The upcoming case will test how far that standard reaches when applied to modern weapons that did not exist at the nation’s founding.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)