The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the government cannot restrict firearm ownership solely based on a person's use of marijuana [1].
This decision removes a significant federal barrier for millions of people in states where marijuana is legal or decriminalized. By striking down the application of the federal ban to marijuana users, the Court shifts the legal landscape regarding the intersection of drug policy and the Second Amendment.
In a nine-zero unanimous opinion written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, the Court ruled in favor of a Texas man who had been barred from owning guns due to his marijuana use [1]. The justices held that the federal ban treating illegal drug users as prohibited firearm possessors is invalid when applied solely to marijuana [2].
Justice Gorsuch wrote that "the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms, and that right is not forfeited by the mere use of marijuana" [3]. The Court said that prohibiting gun ownership based on marijuana consumption violates the Second Amendment because such a restriction is not rooted in the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation [3, 4].
A spokesperson for the Supreme Court said the federal ban on gun possession by unlawful users of controlled substances does not apply to individuals who use marijuana legally [1]. This ruling applies nationwide, regardless of whether the individual resides in a state with legal cannabis [1, 2].
Legal experts noted that while the ruling provides a major victory for marijuana users, it does not entirely dismantle federal drug-related firearm restrictions. Andrew G. McCabe, a senior editor at Law360, said the decision narrows the scope of the federal ban but does not eliminate it, leaving open the possibility of future challenges [5].
“"The Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms, and that right is not forfeited by the mere use of marijuana."”
This ruling creates a legal carve-out for marijuana within the broader federal framework of controlled substances. By tying the right to bear arms to 'historical tradition' rather than current federal drug classifications, the Court has signaled that marijuana is viewed differently than other illicit drugs in the context of constitutional rights. This may prompt further legal challenges regarding other controlled substances or lead to a gradual shift in how federal agencies enforce drug-related firearm prohibitions.
