18+ Content Warning

By clicking Enter, you confirm you are 18 years of age or older and agree to comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws.

Notice: Any content or member activity - including anything you may buy, sell, transfer, or discuss - must comply with current and upcoming laws.

Members are encouraged to stay informed: California Firearm Laws: 2026 Outlook & 2025 Recap . Responsibility for compliance rests solely with the individual member.

caguns.net

Welcome to CAguns.net!
Join our growing community where you can ask questions, share knowledge, or browse our classifieds section.

Sign up for a free account today and unlock full access! Once registered, you can search, post, and take advantage of exclusive features unavailable to guests.

A note on why more of the site now requires an account: automated scrapers and AI systems have been crawling our forums and classifieds at a scale. Requiring sign-in for those sections is the most effective tool we have. It takes a minute to register, it's free, and it keeps what happens here between actual members.

New to California gun ownership or trying to keep up with the changing laws? Check out our sister site CA2A.com — free courses, plain-English legal updates, and step-by-step guides built for California owners.

Advanced features are available only to registered members. Register today!

Legal News Supreme Court agrees to hear gun rights challenge to AR-15 bans

Is it?
Latest news
Supreme Court agrees to hear gun rights challenge to AR-15 bans

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court will decide if assault-style weapons can be banned in response to mass shootings, the latest gun rights disputes the court agreed to hear about the reach of the Second Amendment.

The court on June 30 said it will hear challenges to bans on AR-15s and other semiautomatic rifles in Connecticut and Chicago's Cook County, Illinois.

Connecticut's ban was passed in response to the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

In deciding its most recent Second Amendment cases, the court this month struck down a Hawaii law that required gun owners to get permission before bringing a firearm into a store or other private property that’s open to the public. The court also limited the application of a decades-old federal law that bars firearms possession by certain drug users.

The justices have been inundated by gun rights appeals as the court refines how to apply its landmark 2022 ruling that firearm regulations must be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

Gun rights advocates asked the justices to review lower court rulings upholding restrictions.

Gun owners and sellers challenging bans on AR-15s in Illinois and other states counter that “tens of millions of law-abiding Americans have long lawfully owned hundreds of millions of these devices as integral components of constitutionally protected and legal firearms.”

In the Cook County case, gun owners called the AR-15 the “modern descendant of the rifles that were borne by the militiamen of the Revolution and the pioneers who struck out West in search of a better life.”

“The question can be fairly asked, if the Second Amendment does not protect it, what could it possible protect?” the challengers wrote in their appeal.

Last year, the Supreme Court declined to review Maryland’s ban on assault-style weapons and Rhode Island's ban on high-capacity magazines, although Justice Brett Kavanaugh said his colleagues would need to “address the AR-15 issue soon.”

The Supreme Court is expected to debate the issue in the term that begins in October and hand down a decision by next summer.
 
It should be noted though that while Kagan called them that in Smith and Wesson v Mexico in 2025, the lower courts ignored that language and still said they aren't in common use
I don't have hopes for Kagan. She still believes Bruen was a mistake. I hope the other 5(hopefully 6) will restore the 2A nationwide
 
Based on recent firearms cases, I am pretty sure we have the five (or six) votes required on this issue.

However, I am trying to manage my expectations because, as I understand it, the Connecticut and Cook County bans are outright prohibitions on all “AR-style rifles.”

Since we don’t have one of those in California, it’s unclear to me who a positive ruling would affect our “featureless” versus fixed mag and AR pistol statutory framework.
 
Based on recent firearms cases, I am pretty sure we have the five (or six) votes required on this issue.

However, I am trying to manage my expectations because, as I understand it, the Connecticut and Cook County bans are outright prohibitions on all “AR-style rifles.”

Since we don’t have one of those in California, it’s unclear to me who a positive ruling would affect our “featureless” versus fixed mag and AR pistol statutory framework.
They have both outright prohibitions on AR-15s and a bunch of named rifles (our Roberti-Roos equivalent but their copycat bans are enforced), and a feature ban for all other semi automatics in the same law. The Supreme Court is discussing both parts of the law.
 
They have both outright prohibitions on AR-15s and a bunch of named rifles (our Roberti-Roos equivalent but their copycat bans are enforced), and a feature ban for all other semi automatics in the same law. The Supreme Court is discussing both parts of the law.
That’s the screwed part. When I lived in ca I had an armalite I bought in 97. Sb23 came along added to the Roberto Roos basically. I did register it and had no issues shooting it on blm land. Did draw more attention at a public range when fools telling me its illegal aw when it was non their business.

But later when off list lowers came out I could have swapped all my parts over use a bullet button and it was ok but couldn’t put a bullet button on my armalite because it was listed. (Not that I would want too but just saying). After my move I did not deregister it in ca in case I felt like taking it back for a shoot with fam or friends. Did leave a couple 30 round mags at my moms house in a safe though since they can’t leave the state and I can’t bring in my current ones.
 
Back
Top Bottom