The Supreme Court agreed on June 30 to hear two cases challenging state-level bans on AR-15-style semiautomatic rifles, the first time the high court has accepted a direct constitutional test of assault weapons restrictions. The cases, Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins, were both brought by the Second Amendment Foundation and arrive from circuits that upheld the bans being challenged.

Viramontes, originally filed in 2021, challenges the assault weapons bans enacted by Illinois and Cook County, which the 7th Circuit sustained. Grant v. Higgins comes from Connecticut, where the 2nd Circuit upheld that state's prohibition on commonly owned semiautomatic rifles. The Court consolidated both petitions into a single grant for one hour of oral argument focused on a single question: whether the Second Amendment protects AR-15-platform and similar semiautomatic rifles in common use. Argument is expected in the October 2026 term, with no date yet set.

In a statement, SAF co-founder Alan Gottlieb called the cert grant "the case we've been building toward since Bruen." The NRA Institute for Legislative Action characterized the development as a watershed moment in firearms rights litigation. The Bruen text-and-history standard — which requires states to justify firearms restrictions against analogues in the founding-era tradition — has produced conflicting lower-court results when applied to semiautomatic rifle restrictions, with some circuits upholding bans and others striking them. The Supreme Court's consolidation of Viramontes and Grant v. Higgins puts those conflicts before the justices for resolution.

The cert grant arrived one day before the Justice Department filed simultaneous federal lawsuits against Virginia and California over those states' newly enacted assault weapons restrictions. Virginia's law, signed by Governor Abigail Spanberger in June and effective July 1, bans the sale and transfer of semiautomatic centerfire rifles with detachable magazines capable of accepting more than 15 rounds. The DOJ's California complaint, filed July 1 in the Central District as United States v. California and Robert Bonta, challenges that state's Glock ban and Handgun Roster on separate Second Amendment grounds. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, in announcing the California suit, said the Second Amendment "is a sacred right belonging to all Americans, even those in California."

Shooting News Weekly reported that the 9th Circuit placed its own California assault weapons ban case on hold pending the outcome of Viramontes and Grant v. Higgins, a signal that lower courts expect a ruling with broad national effect. Armed American News and Bearing Arms both noted that Viramontes is the oldest of the major post-Bruen assault weapons cases still working through the courts, having been filed before Bruen was decided, and that both SAF and the NRA have litigation positioned to benefit regardless of which jurisdictional thread SCOTUS pulls first.

The outcome will directly affect millions of lawful rifle owners across the more than a dozen states that currently restrict or ban commonly owned semiautomatic rifles. Oral argument has not been scheduled; October term cases typically run from October through April, putting a ruling most likely in late June or early July 2027.