NYPD files Supreme Court brief warning assault rifle bans protect officers

Legal filings submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court reveal that New York City officials view local assault rifle bans as a critical financial and safety buffer for its largest police force. The department argues that overturning these regulations would expose officers to higher casualty rates and force costly equipment upgrades.

City Corporation Counsel Steven Banks filed the amicus brief on behalf of the NYPD last week. The document challenges the appeal in Viramontes v. Cook County, a case that seeks to strike down prohibitions on semi-automatic rifles in Illinois and Connecticut. Banks and his legal team assert that the current laws prevent a surge in officer injuries and deaths associated with high-velocity firearms.

The brief quantifies the risk using research data. It states that assault weapon shootings result in an average of 2.3 times more deaths and 22.7 times more injuries compared to incidents involving other firearms. Banks notes that the NYPD’s experience confirms these weapons pose a unique threat because they are far more powerful than standard handguns.

The city points to recent events to illustrate the financial and human cost. In July 2025, Officer Didarul Islam was killed in a mass shooting in Midtown Manhattan. The attacker used an AR-15 style weapon and killed four people in total. The brief argues that standard NYPD gear, including 9mm handguns and vests designed to stop handgun rounds, would be insufficient against such threats if assault rifles become common.

Banks warns that legalizing these weapons would trigger an arms race. He explains that officers cannot holster rifles like handguns, limiting their options for less lethal force. The filing suggests that widespread public carrying of rifles would force the NYPD to re-equip its officers, a process that occurred in the 1990s when leadership switched from .38-caliber revolvers to semi-automatic pistols due to rising threats.

The case before the Supreme Court consolidates challenges from Cook County, Illinois, and Connecticut. Lower courts in the Seventh Circuit affirmed the local bans in 2024 after the district court ruled in Cook County’s favor. The Supreme Court has granted review and will hear arguments in December. The high court recently supported Second Amendment rights in two other decisions, including a ruling on concealed carry restrictions in Hawaii and a case involving federal marijuana use restrictions.

The NYPD’s position contrasts with briefs from other police departments that welcomed the prospect of citizens carrying assault weapons. Banks concluded that the job of law enforcement becomes more difficult and dangerous in dense cities when the public carries highly lethal firearms. The city’s argument centers on the operational costs and safety risks of managing open carry in a metropolitan environment.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider the constitutionality of bans on AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles this December. The decision will determine whether local governments can maintain restrictions on specific types of firearms based on public safety concerns.