Grant v. Higgins: Connecticut's AR-15 Ban Brief
Grant v. Higgins: Connecticut's AR-15 Ban Brief. Connecticut's Supreme Court brief defending its AR-15 ban relies on medieval English law and flawed comparisons. Here's what the state actually argued—and why { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@graph": [ { "@type": "Organization", "@id": "https://greyhive.com#organization", "name": "Greyhive", "url": "https://greyhive.com", "description": "Greyhive is a censorship-resistant video platform for the firearms, 2A, hunting, and outdoor industries — where creators build, review, and monetize unfiltered content.", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://greyhive.com/static/uploads/images/ae198483-01c9-44b4-a16a-03f516ceaf66.svg", "width": 512, "height": 512 }, "sameAs": [ "https://x.com/greyhive", "https://www.instagram.com/greyhive/", "https://www.youtube.com/@Greyhive", "https://www.linkedin.com/company/greyhive/" ] }, { "@type": "WebSite", "@id": "https://greyhive.com#website", "url": "https://greyhive.com", "name": "Greyhive", "description": "Greyhive is a censorship-resistant video platform for the firearms, 2A, hunting, and outdoor industries — where creators build, review, and monetize unfiltered content.", "publisher": { "@id": "https://greyhive.com#organization" } }, { "@type": "Person", "@id": "https://greyhive.com/c/gun_guru#person", "name": "Gun Guru", "url": "https://greyhive.com/c/gun_guru", "description": "Gun Guru is a Greyhive creator producing original 2A, firearms, hunting, and outdoor content.", "image": "https://greyhive.com/lazy-static/avatars/d89c0392-fdea-40f3-8282-2ad18d743e5b.jpg" }, { "@type": "Article", "@id": "https://greyhive.com/blog/connecticut-ar15-ban-scotus-brief-analysis#article", "isPartOf": { "@id": "https://greyhive.com#website" }, "mainEntityOfPage": { "@id": "https://greyhive.com/blog/connecticut-ar15-ban-scotus-brief-analysis" }, "url": "https://greyhive.com/blog/connecticut-ar15-ban-scotus-brief-analysis", "headline": "Grant v. Higgins: Connecticut's AR-15 Ban Brief", "name": "Grant v. Higgins: Connecticut's AR-15 Ban Brief", "description": "Connecticut's Supreme Court brief defending its AR-15 ban relies on medieval English law and flawed comparisons. Here's what the state actually argued—and why", "articleSection": "Culture & News", "articleBody": "Grant v. Higgins is the Second Amendment case that will decide whether Connecticut can keep banning AR-15 platform rifles, and the state's merits brief — filed by Attorney General William Tong on October 21 — builds its defense almost entirely on English weapons law from the 1300s through the 1600s. Oral arguments are set for December 2. In his Saturday night breakdown on Greyhive, Gun Guru — broadcasting from what he calls \"behind enemy lines in Connecticut\" — walked page by page through the state's filing and the companion Cook County brief in the Illinois case. His read: the brief never establishes the one thing Bruen actually requires, which is text, history, and tradition dating to the American founding. What follows is the substance of what Connecticut argued, the specific historical sources it cited, and where a Connecticut firearms instructor who teaches this state's law for a living says the argument falls apart. Key Takeaways Connecticut's brief cites English weapons restrictions from 1328, 1383, 1396, 1504, 1541, 1579, and 1611 — all predating the United States by centuries. The state's core claim is that AR-15s are \"unusually dangerous,\" which Gun Guru notes inverts the Heller standard of \"dangerous and unusual.\" Connecticut argues AR-15s can't be protected simply because they're in common use; roughly 40 million-plus are owned in the U.S. versus the ~200,000 stun guns the Court …