A major gun rights organization has formally asked the U.S. Supreme Court to step in on a growing legal conflict: whether the government can ban someone from owning a firearm for life simply because they use marijuana.
On Thursday, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) filed legal documents supporting a challenge to the federal “lifetime ban” currently placed on marijuana users.
The case, known as United States v. Hemani, centers on whether current federal laws violate the Second Amendment. While marijuana has been legalized for medical or recreational use in 40 states, it remains illegal at the federal level.
READ: Leaked Email Orders ICE Agents To Stop Engaging With Minnesota ‘Agitators’
This creates a confusing trap for millions of Americans who are following state laws but effectively waive their right to own a gun the moment they use cannabis. The SAF, joined by partners like the California Rifle & Pistol Association and the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, argues that this total ban goes too far.
In their filing to the Supreme Court, the group argues that the government is ignoring history. They point to recent court rulings that say gun laws must align with the nation’s historical tradition. According to SAF Director of Legal Research Kostas Moros, history supports disarming someone while they are actively intoxicated, but not stripping them of their rights forever.
“The government’s position defies Bruen and Rahimi by seeking to impose a permanent disarmament on law-abiding citizens who use marijuana, even when sober, without any distinctly similar historical tradition to justify such a draconian restriction,” said SAF Director of Legal Research and Education Kostas Moros. “History shows that Founding-era laws addressed the dangers of intoxication and firearms through temporary restrictions on those actively impaired, never by stripping gun rights from sober individuals who occasionally use socially accepted substances like alcohol — or, by analogy, marijuana today. We urge the Court to affirm the Fifth Circuit and reject this unconstitutional overreach.”
READ: Border Czar Tom Homan Drops Surprise Update On Minnesota ICE Raids After Meeting With Walz
The outcome of this case could impact millions of people. Under current rules, a person who uses marijuana—even for doctor-prescribed pain management—is prohibited from purchasing or possessing a firearm. The SAF believes this is an “unconstitutional overreach” that treats law-abiding citizens like dangerous criminals.
“This case highlights the federal government’s unconstitutional infringement on the right to keep and bear arms for those legally using marijuana, ignoring clear historical limits,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “SAF is committed to defending these rights against outdated prohibitions, and we believe this warrants the Supreme Court’s affirmation.”
The groups are urging the Supreme Court to side with the lower courts that have already questioned the ban, hoping to secure gun rights for those who use a substance that is now widely accepted across the country.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox
