Supreme Court Unanimously Narrows Gun Ban for Drug Users

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday issued a unanimous decision striking down the application of a federal gun law used to prosecute Hunter Biden, ruling that the government cannot automatically disarm occasional marijuana users without individualized proof of dangerousness. The 9-0 ruling in United States v. Hemani marks a significant Second Amendment decision from the conservative-leaning Court.

The Case and the Ruling

The case centered on Ali Danial Hemani, a dual U.S.-Pakistan citizen from Texas whose home was raided by FBI agents in August 2022. Agents found a Glock 19 pistol and 60 grams of marijuana. Hemani admitted to using marijuana “about every other day” but was never accused of being intoxicated while possessing the firearm, threatening anyone, or posing a danger to himself or others, according to Fox News.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, held that the government’s prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) — a law prohibiting firearm possession by unlawful drug users — violated the Second Amendment. The Court rejected the government’s argument that historical laws targeting “habitual drunkards” justified the modern restriction.

“The government’s analogy fails under every measure it asks us to consider,” Gorsuch wrote. “The historical laws on which it relies targeted different kinds of people, did so for different reasons, and operated in different ways.”

Scope of the Decision

The ruling is narrow in important respects. The Court did not strike down § 922(g)(3) entirely. As CBS News reported, the decision does not address bans on drug addicts, people who are presently intoxicated, convicted felons, or prosecutions involving individualized proof that a defendant’s drug use renders them dangerous.

Gorsuch acknowledged the risks, writing: “We appreciate that drugs and guns can sometimes make for a dangerous mix.” But he noted that the government’s position would grant officials excessive authority to strip constitutional rights from broad categories of people, warning that affording the government such power “would risk allowing it to ‘quickly swallow’ the Second Amendment.”

The Marijuana Context

A key factor in the ruling was the rapidly shifting legal landscape around cannabis. More than 40 states have legalized marijuana to some degree, and over 15% of Americans aged 12 and older used marijuana in 2024, according to SAMHSA. The Trump administration reclassified medical marijuana as a less-dangerous Schedule III drug in April 2026.

Gorsuch pointedly noted this contradiction in his opinion: “Whatever one thinks of these developments, the federal government has not just tolerated them; it helped fuel them. All of which leaves it awkwardly positioned to suggest that the millions of Americans who now regularly use marijuana are categorically and unusually dangerous.”

Unusual Political Alliances

The case produced remarkable cross-ideological coalitions. Representing Hemani was the American Civil Liberties Union, joined by gun rights groups including the National Rifle Association and cannabis legalization organizations such as NORML. On the opposing side, the Trump administration defended the law alongside gun control groups like Everytown for Gun Safety, the Brady Center, and Giffords Law Center.

Cecillia Wang, ACLU Legal Director, celebrated the outcome: “With nearly half of Americans reporting marijuana use at some point in their lives, this ruling protects the rights of millions and curbs the government’s ability to impose arbitrary and discriminatory penalties.”

Leigh Rome of Giffords Law Center offered a more measured view, telling CBS News that “today’s opinion continues to allow the government to enact and enforce reasonable categorical prohibitions on firearms ownership.”

The Hunter Biden Connection

The law at the center of the case gained national attention when Hunter Biden was convicted under the same statute in June 2024 for purchasing a firearm while addicted to cocaine. President Joe Biden pardoned his son in December 2024. As the New York Post noted, the ruling does not directly overturn Hunter Biden’s conviction since it involved different facts — cocaine addiction rather than occasional marijuana use, and false statements on the firearm purchase form.

What Comes Next

The decision leaves several important questions open. Lower courts will now need to apply the Hemani framework to future § 922(g)(3) prosecutions, and Congress may consider crafting more targeted legislation. The Supreme Court is also expected to rule soon on another major Second Amendment case involving a Hawaii law that restricts carrying handguns on private property open to the public.

Kevin Sabet, CEO of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, which opposes legalization, condemned the ruling, arguing that “public health and safety are the collateral damage in this decision.” But for now, the Court has sent a clear signal: the government cannot disarm millions of Americans based on categorical assumptions about drug use alone.