When it comes to jurisprudence relating to Second Amendment issues, the Supreme Court appears to move particularly slowly, compared to other subjects, but has left a cookie-crumb trail of hints as to its posture on AR-15 rifles, and now, the Justice Department is signaling back, in what could be the setup to finally address a nationwide attack on America’s most popular rifle.
On Tuesday, May 5, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, led by AAG Harmeet Dhillon, filed suit against Denver’s 36-year-old ban on AR-15s. In our reporting, this publication has noticed a pattern of actions from the DOJ which have specifically focused on AR-15 bans around the nation. We suggested that pattern could be a signal to the Supreme Court.
In a post-announcement interview Ms. Dhillon confirmed what we have suspected – the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, under its new Second Amendment Section, is pursuing targeted cases that are likely to create a circuit split, making it more likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will take a case on a topic that has “percolated” – a posture of non-involvement until a case has been fully explored by lower courts.
How long such a process takes defies definition, as it is up to the subjective standards of the court. Justice Kavanaugh gave one of the most substantial hints in 2025 when he stated that, “in my view, this court should and presumably will address the AR-15 issue soon, in the next term or two.”
In AAG Dhillon’s May 5 interview with Just the News, she filled in additional details on the Justice Department’s strategy to help achieve the conditions under which it would be likely for the Supreme Court to take an AR-15 case, affirming, “We intend to make sure they do that.”
Ms. Dhillon went on to add, “We intend to make sure that citizens of Denver have the same rights as citizens of the rest of America. And we do have other cities like this. The District of Columbia also has a similar ban. We have sued them already, and we will be absolutely looking for other opportunities.”
The AAG’s pattern of focus on AR-15 cases in particular is significant. In September of 2025, the Justice Department under Ms. Dhillon’s lead submitted an amicus curiae brief in ANJRPC v. Platkin, a case challenging New Jersey’s “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazine ban. In that brief, she stated, “New Jersey’s complete bans on possessing rifles such as the AR-15 and magazines with a more-than-ten-round capacity violate the Second Amendment.”
In December of 2025, Ms. Dhillon brought the Justice Department’s first affirmative lawsuit against an AR-15 ban in a lawsuit targeting the District of Columbia.
In June of 2025, Ms. Dhillon submitted a pro-2A brief in Barnett v. Raoul, the case challenging the Illinois “assault weapons” ban, and on September 22 she represented the Justice Department by speaking during oral arguments before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in the same case.
Split circuits (different circuit courts issuing differing opinions on the same legal issue) are generally necessary for the modern Supreme Court to intervene on a substantive issue like gun control. In her Just the News interview, Ms. Dhillon explained how the DOJ aims to achieve that goal:
There is kind of a Circuit split on this issue. So the Fourth Circuit has some bad precedent on this issue, and we intend to create some good precedent in some other circuits in addition to what’s already there. And then I think it would be ripe for the (Supreme) Court.
And the court has really signaled in several opinions where it is going with this. And I think there is going to be a ruling eventually from the Supreme Court that AR-15s are legal for all law-abiding citizens to own and operate.
Ms. Dhillon went on to add why the issue would be of interest to the Supreme Court, noting that it implicates prior decisions:
I think the AR-15 ban is one that really is a kind of low-hanging fruit, because the Supreme Court held in a 9-0 opinion in the Smith and Wesson case that the AR-15 is the most commonly owned and operated rifle in the United States. And so when you add that statistic to the ruling in the Bruen and Heller decisions, which talk about firearms that are in common use and for law-abiding citizens, that leads to the inexorable conclusion that the AR-15 is presumptively legal all over America.
The Second Amendment Section led by Ms. Dhillon, under the Civil Rights Division, seems to enjoy more public support from the Acting Attorney General than it has from the previous Bondi Justice Department.
“The Constitution is not a suggestion, and the Second Amendment is not a second-class right. Denver’s ban on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles directly violates the right to bear arms. This Department of Justice will vigorously defend the liberties of law-abiding citizens,” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in praise of Ms. Dhillon’s actions yesterday against Denver.
