Sandy Hook families ask Supreme Court to uphold assault weapon bans

Relatives of victims killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting have urged the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold state and local bans on certain semiautomatic rifles, describing them as unusually lethal and dangerous for civilian use.

The parents of five of the 20 first-graders killed and relatives of one educator filed a “friend of the court” brief Wednesday in two cases challenging bans in Connecticut and the Chicago area. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in both cases on December 2.

"The assault on Sandy Hook Elementary School, carried out by an untrained, 112-pound youth armed with an AR-15-style rifle, is graphic proof of the unusual and extreme lethality of that firearm and the harm it is capable of inflicting on American communities," the relatives' filing states. They added that they "seek to protect other American families from becoming casualties in another AR-15 killing spree."

Gun rights advocates argue that banning semiautomatic rifles, which are legally owned by millions of Americans, is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. Supporters of the bans contend that these rifles were designed for military use and are too dangerous for civilians, suggesting they should be regulated similarly to machine guns.

More than 40 other individuals and groups, mostly in favor of the rifle bans, also filed amicus briefs on Wednesday. These filings are submitted by parties not directly involved in the litigation.

The 20-year-old gunman, Adam Lanza, used a Bushmaster AR-15-style rifle with high-capacity ammunition magazines to fire more than 150 bullets in about four minutes during the 2012 massacre. The event prompted Connecticut to ban such rifles in 2013, a law that is now before the Supreme Court.

Jennifer Hensel, whose 6-year-old daughter Avielle Richman was killed, stated in the relatives' brief that her daughter was shot multiple times in the face and authorities informed her that her body would be unrecognizable. "A moral imperative is truly at hand," Hensel said. "Please, do not allow more blood to soak our Connecticut soil from assault-style weapons. A fundamental duty to protect all in Connecticut is at stake."

Another victim, 6-year-old Dylan Hockley, was shot five times, according to a similar brief filed by Sandy Hook Promise, a gun violence prevention group founded by families affected by the shooting. The filing noted that his body was "destroyed so completely, his mother was told not to touch him to say goodbye as he lay in his coffin."

"The effects of these weapons on children’s bodies are catastrophic and obscene," the brief stated.

Dylan's mother and Sandy Hook Promise co-founder, Nicole Hockley, implored the Supreme Court to prioritize children's safety. "I know firsthand the devastation a semiautomatic rifle can inflict in minutes on the bodies, hearts, and minds of children — and the families who love them," she said. "No family should have to live with that pain. As the Court considers this case, the consequences being experienced by children and communities cannot be an afterthought."

Gun rights supporters, while expressing sympathy for victims' families and condemning mass shootings, argue that restricting Second Amendment rights is not the solution. They point out that school shootings occur even with bans on so-called “assault weapons."

"Solving or at least mitigating school shootings is not about banning a type of gun," said Konstadinos Moros, director of legal research and education for the Second Amendment Foundation, a plaintiff in the challenges to both the Connecticut and Cook County, Illinois, bans. "While some guns are obviously more capable than others, school shooters inflict harm not because of the capability of their firearms, but because of the helplessness of their targets. The real solution lies in proper school security, which can both more quickly respond to shootings, and deter attacks from happening in the first place, given that the depraved individuals who commit these sorts of crimes tend to pick ‘soft targets.’"

The Supreme Court, which has previously expanded gun rights, announced in June that it would hear appeals challenging bans on the AR-15 and similar semiautomatic firearms in Connecticut and the Chicago area. The Cook County ban dates back to 1993. Lower courts have upheld both laws.

About a dozen states have similar laws, covering major cities such as New York, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C. Congress allowed a national assault weapons ban to expire in 2004, but Democrats have advocated for its renewal in response to mass shootings. States have also continued to enact their own legislation, including recent measures in Virginia and Rhode Island.

This dispute is the latest high-profile gun case to reach the court since its conservative majority issued a landmark ruling in 2022 that expanded Second Amendment rights, leading to challenges against firearm laws nationwide. The court stated that any gun laws must have a strong grounding in the nation's historical traditions.