A federal appeals court has declared the application of a long-standing law banning firearm … [+]
A federal appeals court has declared the application of a long-standing law banning firearm ownership for illegal drug users unconstitutional as it violates the Second Amendment.
This ruling, announced on Wednesday, August 9, involved the case of Patrick Daniels, a marijuana user. He had been found guilty under that law when police discovered a handgun, a semi-automatic rifle, and marijuana cigarette butts in his car during a traffic stop in Hancock County, Mississippi, in April 2022. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration didn’t conduct a drug test, but Daniels admitted to using marijuana, which goes against federal law.
He was given a nearly four-year prison sentence for breaking 18 U.S. Code 922, also called “Unlawful acts,” a part of U.S. law that lists prohibited firearm-related actions.
However, a trio of judges from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, Louisiana, determined that the federal law violated a Mississippi man’s right to possess and carry firearms, as established by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The court’s decision stems from a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that broadened gun rights.
In June 2022, the Supreme Court delivered its verdict in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen.
Through a 6-3 judgment, the Court invalidated New York’s long-standing law regarding licenses for carrying firearms in public and introduced a significant novel structure for assessing legal contentions involving the Second Amendment.
The Court stated that the Second Amendment safeguards the right to possess a loaded handgun in public for personal protection. It further determined that New York’s law, which required residents to demonstrate a valid reason to acquire a concealed carry permit, violated the constitutional right.
In the case of Daniels, U.S. Circuit Judge Jerry Smith stated that the ruling indicated that 18 U.S. Code 922 was not valid when applied to him.
“In short, our history and tradition may support some limits on an intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon, but it does not justify disarming a sober citizen based exclusively on his past drug usage. Nor do more generalized traditions of disarming dangerous persons support this restriction on nonviolent drug users. As applied to Daniels, then, § 922(g)(3) violates the Second Amendment. We reverse the judgment of conviction and render a dismissal of the indictment,” the ruling reads.
This isn’t the first time a judge has reached such a decision in cases involving a clash between the right to bear arms and marijuana possession.
In February, a federal judge in Oklahoma concluded that a federal law prohibiting firearm possession by marijuana users is unconstitutional, citing the same 2022 Supreme Court ruling that expanded gun rights.
Federal law forbids firearm possession by marijuana users due to marijuana’s Schedule I classification under the Controlled Substances Act. Furthermore, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives states that even legal state marijuana use is considered to make someone an “unlawful user” of a controlled substance, thereby resulting in a ban on firearm possession.
The legal conflict between state and federal marijuana laws has created a complex legal situation that can impact people’s rights, particularly their right to own guns. According to federal law, individuals who use marijuana are prohibited from possessing firearms, even if it’s legal in their state. This creates a dilemma for gun owners who use marijuana, whether for recreational or medical purposes, as they might need to choose between retaining their firearms or using marijuana.