By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
The Second Amendment Foundation has become as legal powerhouse in the fight over gun rights in the U.S., and so far just this week, attorneys representing the Washington state-based organization have filed legal briefs in cases challenging gun control laws in Massachusetts and neighboring Connecticut.
The latter case is seeking review by the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as Grant v. Rovella, it challenges the ban on so-called “assault weapons” by the state of Connecticut. As noted by SAF in an announcement to the media, the petition was originally filed in November 2025, urging the Supreme Court to grant review because the outcome would settle “once and for all that AR-15-style rifles are most certainly in “common use” and therefore protected by the Second Amendment.”
This is not the first time a SAF case has sought high court review. SAF is joined in this case by the Connecticut Citizens Defense League and three private citizens, Michael Stiefel, Jennifer Hamilton and Eddie Grant, Jr., for whom the case is named.
“This is SAF’s second ‘assault weapons’ ban challenge we have before the Supreme Court for consideration,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The list of banned firearms in Connecticut – and elsewhere across the United States – make peaceable gun owners felons for simply owning certain types of arms for self-defense. This obstruction to the Second Amendment rights of Americans cannot be allowed to stand, and we are optimistic the Court will agree to hear at least one of our lawsuits in relation to these infringements on the right to keep and bear arms.”
“There are tens of millions rifles in circulation across America that meet Connecticut’s made-up definition of ‘assault weapon,’” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “Given that these firearms are no different than any other semi-automatic firearm owned by citizens for self-defense, there is no doubt these arms are in ‘common use’ and are certainly covered under the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court has already stated that a firearm cannot be banned if it is in common use for lawful purposes, which is exactly what is happening in Connecticut and elsewhere across the country.”
At the same time, SAF and its partners filed a reply brief in the case of Escher v. Noble, which is now before the US. District Court in Massachusetts. The case challenges Massachusetts’ ban on the purchase, carry and possession of firearms by 18-20-year-olds.
Joining SAF are the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners’ Action League, Commonwealth Second Amendment, Firearms Policy Coalition, Gun Owners of America and a private citizen, Mack Escher, for whom the case is named.
In a statement to the media announcing the brief, SAF Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack explained, “There is no historical tradition of stripping certain adults of their gun rights because of their age. And, as we point out in our brief, at the time of the Founding, citizens in this age group were not only allowed to own guns but were required to. At minimum, all adults under 21 are part of ‘the People’ contemplated by the Second Amendment and therefore have every right to purchase, carry and possess firearms.”
Gottlieb noted this is just one of several similar lawsuits SAF has in progress, challenging gun restrictions on young adults.
“You simply cannot ban adults from exercising their Second Amendment rights because of their age,” Gottlieb said. “If you’re 18 or older you’re considered an adult as a matter of law, so why then is the Second Amendment treated as a second-class right for this subset of adults?”
