The Second Modification Basis (SAF) is taking its combat towards Illinois-style gun bans to the best court docket within the land.
On August 27, 2025, the group formally petitioned the U.S. Supreme Courtroom to overview Viramontes v. Cook dinner County, a long-running case difficult the county’s prohibition on so-called “assault weapons.”
Case Background
Filed in 2021, Viramontes was paused whereas the Supreme Courtroom determined Bruen in 2022 and whereas Illinois lawmakers handed their very own sweeping “assault weapons” ban—laws now beneath hearth in SAF’s separate case, Harrel v. Raoul.
Cook dinner County’s ordinance mirrors the statewide regulation, barring possession of AR-15s and different semi-automatic rifles that tens of millions of Individuals lawfully personal. SAF is joined within the go well with by the Firearms Coverage Coalition and two personal residents.
Why This Case Issues
In accordance with SAF, the Cook dinner County ban strikes on the coronary heart of the Second Modification by outlawing peculiar firearms in frequent use. The group factors out that “assault weapon” is a political invention designed to blur the road between semi-automatics and machine weapons.
SEE ALSO: The Mozambique Drill in The Motion pictures
Invoice Sack, SAF’s Director of Authorized Operations, stated the Supreme Courtroom has signaled curiosity in taking over rifle bans quickly, and that this case is “a strong car for that overview.”
Justice Clarence Thomas lately underscored that time in his dissent from the denial of Snope v. Brown, warning that continued delays depart tens of millions of Individuals stripped of their rights.
SAF’s Place
SAF founder and Govt Vice President Alan Gottlieb criticized Cook dinner County’s regulation as an ideological try and disarm residents:
“The disenfranchisement of a complete inhabitants of residents is an absolute infringement on their Second Modification rights,” he stated. “We’ve fought this case for a lot too lengthy and it’s time for the Supreme Courtroom to step in.”
The petition argues that AR-15s are functionally no totally different from different semi-automatic rifles, making them protected beneath the Courtroom’s Heller and Bruen precedents, which safeguard firearms in “frequent use.”
What’s Subsequent
If the Supreme Courtroom agrees to listen to Viramontes, the case may turn into a serious check of whether or not bans on America’s hottest rifles can stand beneath the Structure.
With Illinois’ statewide ban additionally beneath overview in Harrel v. Raoul, the stakes are excessive. A ruling couldn’t solely resolve years of litigation in Chicago’s Cook dinner County but additionally ripple throughout states like California, New York, and New Jersey, which implement related restrictions.
