Reply Brief Filed with Supreme Court in Connecticut Firearms Ban Lawsuit

January 26, 2026
3:40 pm

▶

Listen to Article

The Second Amendment Advocacy (SAF) just dropped a bombshell reply brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in *Bianchi v. Frosh*, zeroing in on Connecticut's draconian assault weapons ban—and it's a masterclass in dismantling the gun-grabber playbook. SAF doesn't mince words: AR-15-style rifles aren't some fringe weapon of war; they're the most popular semi-automatic rifles in America, owned by millions of law-abiding citizens for self-defense, hunting, and sport. Backed by mountains of data from ATF reports, sales figures, and surveys showing over 20 million in circulation, the brief shreds the state's claim that these are outside the Second Amendment's protective embrace. It's a direct callback to *Bruen*'s history-and-tradition test, arguing that modern rifles like the AR are the 21st-century equivalent of the musket-armed minutemen—common, customary, and constitutionally sacrosanct. What makes this filing a game-changer? Connecticut's ban, like those in eight other states, hinges on the flimsy fiction that assault weapons are uniquely dangerous outliers, ignoring how these rifles are used in a tiny fraction of crimes compared to handguns. SAF cleverly flips the script, citing *Heller* and *Bruen* to expose the hypocrisy: if bearable arms in common use get protection, why carve out black rifles just because politicians fear their optics? The implications ripple far beyond Hartford— a SCOTUS smackdown here could torch similar bans nationwide, from California's roster roulette to New York's SAFE Act shenanigans, potentially freeing up to 10 million rifles from regulatory purgatory. For the 2A community, it's red meat: this isn't just litigation; it's a precision strike against incremental erosion, reminding the blackrobes that the right to keep and bear arms isn't negotiable. Gun owners, mark your calendars—this reply brief sets the stage for oral arguments that could redefine the battlefield. SAF's not backing down, and neither should we. Rally your networks, flood the amicus pipelines, and keep the pressure on: the AR-15's day in court is our stand for liberty. Victory here means the assault weapons hysteria finally meets its *Bruen*-induced obituary. Stay vigilant, patriots.

Best FFL Software Ranked and Compared!

The Second Amendment Advocacy (SAF) just dropped a bombshell reply brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in *Bianchi v. Frosh*, zeroing in on Connecticut’s draconian assault weapons ban—and it’s a masterclass in dismantling the gun-grabber playbook. SAF doesn’t mince words: AR-15-style rifles aren’t some fringe weapon of war; they’re the most popular semi-automatic rifles in America, owned by millions of law-abiding citizens for self-defense, hunting, and sport. Backed by mountains of data from ATF reports, sales figures, and surveys showing over 20 million in circulation, the brief shreds the state’s claim that these are outside the Second Amendment’s protective embrace. It’s a direct callback to *Bruen*’s history-and-tradition test, arguing that modern rifles like the AR are the 21st-century equivalent of the musket-armed minutemen—common, customary, and constitutionally sacrosanct.

What makes this filing a game-changer? Connecticut’s ban, like those in eight other states, hinges on the flimsy fiction that assault weapons are uniquely dangerous outliers, ignoring how these rifles are used in a tiny fraction of crimes compared to handguns. SAF cleverly flips the script, citing *Heller* and *Bruen* to expose the hypocrisy: if bearable arms in common use get protection, why carve out black rifles just because politicians fear their optics? The implications ripple far beyond Hartford— a SCOTUS smackdown here could torch similar bans nationwide, from California’s roster roulette to New York’s SAFE Act shenanigans, potentially freeing up to 10 million rifles from regulatory purgatory. For the 2A community, it’s red meat: this isn’t just litigation; it’s a precision strike against incremental erosion, reminding the blackrobes that the right to keep and bear arms isn’t negotiable.

Gun owners, mark your calendars—this reply brief sets the stage for oral arguments that could redefine the battlefield. SAF’s not backing down, and neither should we. Rally your networks, flood the amicus pipelines, and keep the pressure on: the AR-15’s day in court is our stand for liberty. Victory here means the assault weapons hysteria finally meets its *Bruen*-induced obituary. Stay vigilant, patriots.

Share this story