The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a major Second Amendment case that will determine whether bans on AR-15s and similar assault-style rifles are constitutional, setting the stage for a landmark ruling that could affect gun laws across the country.

Get today's headlines by email

The justices announced on Tuesday that they will consider challenges to assault weapon bans enacted in Connecticut and the Chicago area. The case will be argued during the court's next term.

Second Amendment Challenge to Be Heard

At the heart of the dispute is whether AR-15s and similar firearms are protected under the Second Amendment. States defending the restrictions argue that these weapons do not fall within the constitutional definition of "arms" that individuals have the right to keep and bear.

Nationwide Impact Expected

The Supreme Court's decision is expected to provide nationwide guidance on the legality of assault weapon bans. Oral arguments are likely to take place after the court's next term begins in October, with a ruling anticipated next year.

According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, around 32 million modern sporting rifles are currently in circulation in the United States.

The case follows years of legal disputes over state assault weapon bans, particularly after the Supreme Court's conservative majority introduced a new Second Amendment standard requiring modern gun regulations to be supported by a historical tradition of similar restrictions.

State Laws Under Scrutiny

Although definitions vary, 10 states have enacted bans on assault weapons, according to gun control advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety. The Supreme Court's ruling could have significant implications for those laws.

The justices had considered whether to take up the case for several months before announcing on Tuesday that they would hear the challenges.

The decision also comes after the court concluded its Second Amendment cases for the current term. In recent rulings, the justices limited the government's authority to prosecute people for possessing firearms solely because they occasionally use marijuana and struck down Hawaii's restrictions on carrying guns on private property.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?

Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 1 July 2026

View full article

NOBODY needs guns like these, including cops and National Guard. If gun collectors (OMFG) want to add them to their arsenal, they must be may irreparably inoperable.

Americans must realise these weapons end up in the hands of Mexican cartels, right?

4 minutes ago, unblocktheplanet said:

NOBODY needs guns like these, including cops and National Guard. If gun collectors (OMFG) want to add them to their arsenal, they must be may irreparably inoperable.

Americans must realise these weapons end up in the hands of Mexican cartels, right?

It's simply a semi-automatic rifle.

A ban on semi automatics, like the AR-15, would ban, one of my best semi autos, Ruger Mini 14, an excellent rifle, back in 1980.

Advertised as vermin shooter for the ranch. Along with fine hunting rifle, extremely accurate, shooting a .223 round. Simple 22 round on a larger shell.

... "Yes, a .223 Remington (and 5.56×45mm NATO) is technically considered a .22 caliber because it fires a bullet that is roughly 0.224 inches in diameter." ...

Is there really a need to ban this ...

Original 1980 advert. Think I bought mine from K-Mart (Walmart type store, without the food).

VS banning something like these ...

Oh wait ... they're Mini 14s also, just dressed up for one's ego, but does the exact same thing.

FIREARMS DON'T KILL, PEOPLE DO

I've had 30 firearms, they never killed or even injured any living thing. Go figure.

2 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

NOBODY needs guns like these, including cops and National Guard. If gun collectors (OMFG) want to add them to their arsenal, they must be may irreparably inoperable.

Americans must realise these weapons end up in the hands of Mexican cartels, right?

This is not for you to decide.

4 hours ago, Effective altruism said:

It's simply a semi-automatic rifle.

Simply a gun to KILL other human beings. That's why they were invented and why they have been used by soldiers in every modern war. There is no reason for an AK to be in private hands.

2 hours ago, TedG said:

This is not for you to decide.

It's for you to decide?!? I am one of many, as are you. I hope others don't follow your opinions on guns.

3 hours ago, KhunLA said:

A ban on semi automatics, like the AR-15, would ban, one of my best semi autos, Ruger Mini 14, an excellent rifle, back in 1980.

Advertised as vermin shooter for the ranch. Along with fine hunting rifle, extremely accurate, shooting a .223 round. Simple 22 round on a larger shell.

... "Yes, a .223 Remington (and 5.56×45mm NATO) is technically considered a .22 caliber because it fires a bullet that is roughly 0.224 inches in diameter." ...

Is there really a need to ban this ...

Original 1980 advert. Think I bought mine from K-Mart (Walmart type store, without the food).

VS banning something like these ...

Oh wait ... they're Mini 14s also, just dressed up for one's ego, but does the exact same thing.

FIREARMS DON'T KILL, PEOPLE DO

I've had 30 firearms, they never killed or even injured any living thing. Go figure.

Goody for you. It would be hard to live with yourself after killing any other human being.

I can see from your post, it's all about showing off.

1 hour ago, unblocktheplanet said:

It's for you to decide?!? I am one of many, as are you. I hope others don't follow your opinions on guns.

I have the right to bear arms.

44 minutes ago, TedG said:

I have the right to bear arms.

Like these arms Ted?

If I were a betting man I would wager that the Supreme Court won't do anything about this. They have become an incredibly weak, diluted, and partisan institution, and they very rarely ever seem to do the right thing these days.

In addition to that America loves their guns, they love their violence, and they don't seem to mind mass killings that much. It is true that America is number one. In mass killings.

Bullets exit an AR-15 barrel at roughly three times the speed of standard handgun ammunition. When the bullet strikes human tissue, its kinetic energy creates a massive shockwave. This can completely pulverize bones, shatter vital organs, and liquefy soft tissue. While a handgun typically leaves a clean, narrow entry and exit wound, high-velocity rounds create giant exit cavities, often leaving large sections of missing tissue.

In the Uvalde massacre, the physical trauma to young children was so severe that medical examiners had to use DNA samples from parents to identify the victims.

This is the gun available when the 2nd amendment was written.

P.S. there are post mortem photos of the wounds from an AR-15 but they may make some people throw up.

14 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Simple 22 round on a larger shell.

... "Yes, a .223 Remington (and 5.56×45mm NATO) is technically considered a .22 caliber because it fires a bullet that is roughly 0.224 inches in diameter." ...

I don't have a dog in this fight but I would argue that this is sophistry......

https://www.ammoforsale.com/ammo-club/22lr-vs-223/?

Concluding paras - below a picture showing the difference in size between the 2 rounds -

Let us underscore this point one more time: the 22 LR and 223 Rem are genuinely incomparable. The 223 Rem’s effective range is four times longer (read more about the 5.56 cartridge’s effective range here.) Its muzzle energy is easily 12 times more powerful. For home defense with a rifle, it’s superb. It’s also great for plinking and varmint hunting.

But the 22 LR is still awesome! Inexpensive, quiet and low-recoil, this little round deserves its popularity. If you only have one firearm, it should be something more suitable for self-defense. But if you were to get a second firearm, then there’s a strong argument in favor of making it a 22 LR!

5 hours ago, topt said:

I don't have a dog in this fight but I would argue that this is sophistry......

https://www.ammoforsale.com/ammo-club/22lr-vs-223/?

Concluding paras - below a picture showing the difference in size between the 2 rounds -

Rifle cartridge size is fairly irrelevant, in reference to murder & crime used in, as 22LR wins hands down, since few crimes in comparison are committed with rifles.

... "AI Overview

More people are killed in the USA using .22 Long Rifle (.22 LR) than with the .223 Remington. The .22 LR is one of the most widely sold and widely owned cartridges in American history. Its ammunition is cheap, widely available, and its low recoil makes it a common choice for both handguns and rifles used in crimes." ...

I definitely know which one I'd rather be shot with though, which is the least thing one has to worry about. 45 yrs in USA, never a victim of crime, or threat of, let alone shot.

Could ban all rifles, and wouldn't make much of a dent in crime, let alone murder rate.

6 hours ago, Purdey said:

Bullets exit an AR-15 barrel at roughly three times the speed of standard handgun ammunition. When the bullet strikes human tissue, its kinetic energy creates a massive shockwave. This can completely pulverize bones, shatter vital organs, and liquefy soft tissue. While a handgun typically leaves a clean, narrow entry and exit wound, high-velocity rounds create giant exit cavities, often leaving large sections of missing tissue.

In the Uvalde massacre, the physical trauma to young children was so severe that medical examiners had to use DNA samples from parents to identify the victims.

This is the gun available when the 2nd amendment was written.

P.S. there are post mortem photos of the wounds from an AR-15 but they may make some people throw up.

And here is the press available when the First Amendment was ratified. Is that the only press that should be free?

6 hours ago, Purdey said:

Bullets exit an AR-15 barrel at roughly three times the speed of standard handgun ammunition. When the bullet strikes human tissue, its kinetic energy creates a massive shockwave. This can completely pulverize bones, shatter vital organs, and liquefy soft tissue. While a handgun typically leaves a clean, narrow entry and exit wound, high-velocity rounds create giant exit cavities, often leaving large sections of missing tissue.

In the Uvalde massacre, the physical trauma to young children was so severe that medical examiners had to use DNA samples from parents to identify the victims.

This is the gun available when the 2nd amendment was written.

P.S. there are post mortem photos of the wounds from an AR-15 but they may make some people throw up.

This is the speech that the First Amendment protected:

This is going to be one of the simplest cases the Supreme Court has ever heard.

The Lawyers will have to respond when the court asks them why their filing has no definition of what specifically IS an assault rifle.

And the response will be "We don't know, but we know one when we see one."

Game over for the anti-gun nuts.

Rifles, including "assault" rifles account for about 3% of firearm deaths in the US, while handguns account for about 95% of firearm deaths, so of course the left is going for the less than 1%. But we all know, the moment they get their toe in the door, it will be confiscation of all guns.

The end game is always the same.

Will a ban help ?

Look at a country like France that has become almost as bad as America.

Despite highly harsh rules to detain a plain handgun, the street killings between drug dealers using military grade automatic rifles has reached alarming levels all over France. Once a paradise, is now a drug dealers ghetto where bystanders daily can risk getting a lost bullet, depending on where they are.

Consequently, bans really are not the solution as the criminals will always get their hands on military grade full auto rifles.

Not to mention how western europe has always paid the price of the opening of the former eastern block and the fall of the Berlin wall. This led to have Europe flodded with military grade rifles and military weaponry, abandonned by the Russians who fled the former Soviet Union run countries, when the Berlin wall fell.

A bit like the Americans did, when they fled Afghanisthan and left behind tons of lethal military weaponry.

More recently, reports that Ukraine corrupt military officers were selling off in the black market, arms from the stocks of weaponry they receive from the west , to any buyer - even to russian mafia groups.

26 minutes ago, SingAPorn said:

Will a ban help ?

Look at a country like France that has become almost as bad as America.

Despite highly harsh rules to detain a plain handgun, the street killings between drug dealers using military grade automatic rifles has reached alarming levels all over France. Once a paradise, is now a drug dealers ghetto where bystanders daily can risk getting a lost bullet, depending on where they are.

Consequently, bans really are not the solution as the criminals will always get their hands on military grade full auto rifles.

Not to mention how western europe has always paid the price of the opening of the former eastern block and the fall of the Berlin wall. This led to have Europe flodded with military grade rifles and military weaponry, abandonned by the Russians who fled the former Soviet Union run countries, when the Berlin wall fell.

A bit like the Americans did, when they fled Afghanisthan and left behind tons of lethal military weaponry.

More recently, reports that Ukraine corrupt military officers were selling off in the black market, arms from the stocks of weaponry they receive from the west , to any buyer - even to russian mafia groups.

The left does not want to do anything about criminals having and or using guns. They (at least the smart ones) know the only guns they will confiscate will be from law abiding citizens.

If the left cares about criminals with guns, anyone that violated parole or probation with a gun, and anyone that committed a crime with a gun, would get mandatory jail time.

23 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

NOBODY needs guns like these, including cops and National Guard. If gun collectors (OMFG) want to add them to their arsenal, they must be may irreparably inoperable.

Americans must realise these weapons end up in the hands of Mexican cartels, right?

well in america, people decide what they need, not government. its called the us constitution

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Rifles, including "assault" rifles account for about 3% of firearm deaths in the US, while handguns account for about 95% of firearm deaths, so of course the left is going for the less than 1%. But we all know, the moment they get their toe in the door, it will be confiscation of all guns.

The end game is always the same.

exactly. its scary having a bunch of trump voters with black rifles, hype up those guns with their endless hollywood mags, but black kids and illegals killing each other in the hood with handguns is ok.

did you see california trying to ban glocks now lol

9 hours ago, Purdey said:

Bullets exit an AR-15 barrel at roughly three times the speed of standard handgun ammunition. When the bullet strikes human tissue, its kinetic energy creates a massive shockwave. This can completely pulverize bones, shatter vital organs, and liquefy soft tissue. While a handgun typically leaves a clean, narrow entry and exit wound, high-velocity rounds create giant exit cavities, often leaving large sections of missing tissue.

In the Uvalde massacre, the physical trauma to young children was so severe that medical examiners had to use DNA samples from parents to identify the victims.

This is the gun available when the 2nd amendment was written.

P.S. there are post mortem photos of the wounds from an AR-15 but they may make some people throw up.

guess you havent studied much about wound ballistics and ballistics if you think a lead ball isnt destructive and lethal and you think all 223 ammo is going to blow huge holes in people.

dead is dead, btw, whether its from a 22lr bouncing around ones chest, or a .36 ball between the eyes or a tap round in the sternum.

A Remington 700 in 0.223 has a greater muzzle velocity than a typical AR-15, and is every bit as deadly, but they don't have the scary black stock and muzzle brake, so they're okay, Morons.