In a unanimous decision [1] that is likely to irritate gun-control advocates, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the government cannot automatically strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights simply because they use marijuana.
The case involved a Texas man charged under a federal law that makes it illegal for unlawful drug users to possess firearms. The government argued that marijuana use alone was enough to justify the restriction. The Supreme Court disagreed, with Justice Neil Gorsuch writing that the Constitution doesn’t allow such a broad, one-size-fits-all ban.
The ruling doesn’t completely invalidate the federal law. The court left room for restrictions on people who are demonstrably dangerous, addicted, or using firearms while impaired. What it rejected was the idea that occasional marijuana use automatically transforms someone into a constitutional outcast.
The decision carries particular significance in states like Michigan, where recreational marijuana is legal under state law but remains illegal under federal law. For years, federal authorities maintained that people who unlawfully used marijuana under federal law were prohibited from possessing firearms. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) repeatedly reinforced that position through guidance and firearm purchase forms, even as states moved toward medical and recreational legalization.
The case could affect a sizable chunk of America. After all, marijuana use is no longer some fringe pastime conducted behind a lava lamp. A 2024 government survey found that more than 15% of Americans age 12 and older had used marijuana in the previous month, while another 2024 study found more than 17 million people use it on a near-daily basis.