Illinois County Seeks to Drop Second Amendment Case After Plaintiff Withdraws
Illinois County asks Supreme Court to drop case after one plaintiff withdraws, raising questions about the case’s validity.
2 min read
Cook County, Illinois, has asked the Supreme Court to dismiss a Second Amendment case involving its ban on semiautomatic guns after one plaintiff announced his withdrawal. Cutberto Viramontes, who sought to purchase an AR-15, filed paperwork to be dropped from Viramontes v. Cook County, prompting the county’s attorneys to request the court’s dismissal of the case, citing that it has become ‘moot.’
According to Cook County, Viramontes had standing to press the appeal, as he was a resident seeking to own an AR-15-style rifle. The county argued that his desire to possess the weapon gave him a ‘concrete stake’ in the legal question of whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to possess such firearms.
If the Supreme Court grants Viramontes’ motion for dismissal, he will no longer be a petitioner. The county noted that the other plaintiff, Christopher Khaya, does not appear to have standing, as he seeks an IMI Galil semiautomatic rifle instead of an AR-15. The Galil, originally designed for the Israeli Defense Forces, is a modified Kalashnikov and comes with large magazines and an effective range of 600 yards.
In briefs filed on Oct. 21, both Connecticut and Cook County cited prohibitions on obscure weapons like launchers and slungshots, arguing that the bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ should remain in place. Dozens of briefs supporting the bans came from religious groups, anti-Second Amendment advocates, Democratic states, historians, and survivors of mass shootings, some accusing firearms companies of promoting AR-15s through ‘unlawful behavior.’
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Dec. 2 and is expected to issue its decision in summer 2027. The case has been consolidated with Grant v. Higgins, which challenges Connecticut’s similar ban on modern semiautomatic firearms.
We are aware of Cook County’s filing. There is every reason that this case should continue, both on behalf of the remaining individual plaintiff, as well as on behalf of SAF’s members. Furthermore, the Second Amendment Foundation has a second case, Grant v. Higgins, which was granted cert on this exact issue. This issue will be addressed by the Supreme Court. Read the filed Suggestion of Mootness here: https://t.co/9YcBFwBaY3
Source: Daily Caller
