US Supreme Court rules marijuana users cannot be automatically banned from owning guns, siding with Texas man

The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected the automatic disarmament of all illegal drug users, ruling 9-0 that the 1968 Gun Control Act's provision barring any "unlawful user" of a controlled substance from possessing a firearm is inconsistent with the Second Amendment as interpreted under the court's 2022 Bruen test.

The case, US v. Hemani, centred on Ali Hemani, a Texas man whose house was raided by federal agents in August 2022. Officers found a Glock 9mm handgun, about 60 grams of marijuana, and cocaine. Hemani admitted using marijuana roughly every other day, and was indicted in 2023 solely for being an "unlawful user" in possession of a firearm. A lower court dismissed the charge, prompting the Trump administration to appeal.

The historical analogy fails

Writing for seven members of the court, Justice Neil Gorsuch said the government's attempt to equate the modern ban with founding‑era laws disarming "habitual drunkards" did not withstand scrutiny.

The government's analogy fails under every measure it asks us to consider.

Gorsuch noted that early American society tolerated a "culture of copious drinking" and that those laws targeted people whose alcohol consumption rendered them incapable of managing their affairs, not merely regular drinkers. The majority opinion stopped short of striking down the addict prohibition portion of the statute and suggested Congress could still regulate occasional users of substances deemed especially dangerous.

Scope of the ruling

Because the Gun Control Act contains no requirement that a defendant be intoxicated at the time of possession, lower courts had already grafted a "habitual use" gloss onto the law. The justices found even that reading too broad. The ruling applies to the "unlawful user" prong and does not directly address the ban on firearm possession by drug addicts. Gorsuch indicated prosecutors may still pursue charges against a user whose habit "renders him a danger to himself or others."

The decision is the latest in a string of high‑court firearm cases since the 2022 Bruen ruling required any gun regulation to have a clear historical analogue. While the court upheld laws protecting domestic‑violence victims and regulating ghost guns, it earlier struck down a ban on bump stocks.

A law with high‑profile history

The same statute led to the 2024 conviction of Hunter Biden, who lied about his narcotics use on a handgun purchase form. President Joe Biden later pardoned his son. Ali Hemani's case attracted unusual support: the ACLU and the National Rifle Association filed briefs in his favour, as did marijuana‑legalisation groups such as NORML, while gun‑safety organisations sided with the government.

Shifting legal landscape

More than half of US states have legalised cannabis in some form, and in April the Trump administration reclassified medical marijuana as a lower‑risk drug. Federal survey data shows over 15 per cent of Americans aged 12 or older used marijuana in the past month, and roughly 17 million people use it near‑daily. The court acknowledged these developments, with Gorsuch noting the federal government had "not only tolerated" the proliferation of state‑level cannabis regimes but had itself loosened restrictions.

We appreciate that drugs and guns can sometimes make for a dangerous mix.

The ruling, while narrow in its focus on the user provision, is expected to affect a large share of the population and to constrain standalone prosecutions of individuals who possess firearms while using marijuana recreationally.