Remington Arms. Co. LLC, the manufacturer of the AR-15 rifle used in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooting, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its appeal of a Connecticut Supreme Court ruling against it.

In its 277-page petition for a writ of certiorari, the gun-maker cited the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that is meant to shield firearm makers from liability when their products are used in acts of violence. Its product was what gunman Adam Lanza used to kill 20 schoolchildren and six teachers at the school.

But in March, Connecticut’s high court rejected that argument, and ruled Remington could be sued under an exception to the PLCAA, which allowed for legal action to proceed under state law regarding the sale and marketing of firearms.

In the opening comments of its appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, Remington makes it clear it is pinning its hopes on the 2005 federal law.

“The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act ‘generally preempts claims against manufacturers and sellers of firearms and ammunition resulting from the criminal use of those products,”‘ the company wrote in its appeal.

The appeal also states: “The Connecticut Supreme Court below held that the PLCAA’s predicate exception encompasses all general statutes merely capable of being applied to firearms sales or marketing. In contrast, both the Second and Ninth Circuits have rejected this broad interpretation of the predicate exception, which would swallow the PLCAA’s immunity rule.”

Representing Remington are Swanson, Martin & Bell Chicago attorneys James Vogts and Andrew Lothson. Neither attorney responded to a request for comment Thursday.

Koskoff Koskoff & Bieder attorney Josh Koskoff represents the plaintiffs—parents of nine of the victims of the shooting. He brought a suit in 2014 seeking financial damages against Remington and its daughter company Bushmaster Firearms International LLC.

“Remington’s filings makes no new or unexpected arguments,” Koskoff said Thursday. “Our state’s highest court has already ruled that the families deserve their day in court and, we are confident, that the U.S. Supreme Court will defer to that well-reasoned opinion.”

Related stories: