SCOTUS Narrows Federal Gun Ban for Marijuana Users, Exposing Overreach in Drug-Control Fusion

In a June 18, 2026, ruling in United States v. Hemani, the Supreme Court held that prosecuting a Texas man for possessing a firearm while regularly using marijuana under 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(3) violates the Second Amendment. Justice Gorsuch’s opinion, joined by a broad coalition including Roberts, Thomas, Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson, rejected the government’s reliance on historical “habitual drunkard” laws, finding they targeted only those rendered incapacitated—not mere regular users. The Court emphasized that early American traditions required evidence of functional impairment or danger, not categorical disarmament based on controlled-substance status alone. The decision underscores tensions between the Controlled Substances Act’s broad health criteria and Bruen’s historical-tradition test, questioning whether federal policy can designate entire groups as presumptively dangerous without individualized findings. Mainstream coverage often framed the case through partisan lenses—gun rights versus drug enforcement—while underplaying its implications for federal power to link regulatory schedules to constitutional disqualifications. Connections to shifting marijuana scheduling (DEA proposals moving cannabis toward Schedule III) and state legalization reveal how §922(g)(3) increasingly clashes with lived realities, where daily cannabis use now rivals or exceeds alcohol in some demographics. The narrow holding leaves room for future challenges but signals limits on using drug prohibitions as a proxy for Second Amendment restrictions without historical grounding.