The Supreme Court will decide whether the Second Amendment protects AR-15-style rifles, granting cert in two consolidated state ban cases on June 30, 2026.
On the final day of its 2025 term, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in two consolidated cases challenging state-level bans on AR-15-platform and similar semiautomatic rifles, signaling that the justices will finally confront a constitutional question they have repeatedly sidestepped [1]. The grants position the Court to issue what could be the most consequential Second Amendment ruling since *New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen* in 2022.
The two cases, *Viramontes v. Cook County* and *Grant v. Higgins*, were granted together and will be argued during the fall 2026 term [1]. *Viramontes* challenges Cook County, Illinois's prohibition on commonly owned semiautomatic rifles, while *Grant* targets Connecticut's parallel statutory ban [1]. The Court consolidated the grants, treating them as a single vehicle to resolve whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right to possess semiautomatic rifles that are in common civilian use [1]. The Second Amendment Foundation and NRA-ILA are among the organizations backing the challengers [2].
The grants arrive after a notable sidestep. Last term, the Court declined review in *Snope v. Brown*, which had presented a similar challenge to Maryland's ban, frustrating gun-rights advocates who argued the circuit courts were openly defying *Bruen*'s text-and-history framework [1]. The decision to grant in *Viramontes* and *Grant* suggests at least four justices concluded the lower-court conflict had matured enough to require resolution. Laws in at least six states, including Illinois, Connecticut, Maryland, California, New York, and New Jersey, restrict or prohibit possession of the firearms at issue, meaning the ruling will carry immediate regulatory consequences across a substantial portion of the country [3].
The central legal question turns on whether AR-15-platform rifles qualify as arms "in common use" for lawful purposes, the standard the Court articulated in *District of Columbia v. Heller* in 2008 and reaffirmed through *Bruen* [1]. State defenders of the bans argue such weapons are uniquely dangerous and fall outside constitutional protection regardless of their prevalence. Challengers counter that tens of millions of the rifles are lawfully owned and that popularity alone satisfies *Heller*'s test [3].
Briefing schedules have not yet been set. Oral argument is expected in the October 2026 sitting, with a decision likely before the Court's recess in June 2027 [1]. The ruling will bind every state and federal circuit, effectively closing the decade-long post-*Bruen* litigation wave over assault-weapon statutes, one way or the other.