The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a Texas man can’t be prosecuted for being a regular user of marijuana and owning a gun. File Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo
The Supreme Court said Thursday that a Texas man can’t be prosecuted under a law that bans regular users of controlled substances from having firearms.
The justices decided unanimously that the “habitual user” law was inconsistent with the Second Amendment of the Constitution.
“We appreciate that drugs and guns can sometimes make for a dangerous mix,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the opinion. But, Gorsuch wrote, the law could not be squared with the court’s standard that gun restrictions must be based on the nation’s “tradition.”
According to Gorsuch’s opinion, the FBI had suspected Ali Danial Hemani, a dual American and Pakistani citizen, of having ties to terrorist organizations. Hemani was born in Texas and has lived most of his life in Dallas. When the authorities searched his home in 2022, he cooperated and turned over his legally owned gun. He pointed out some marijuana and said he used it about every other day.
Six months later, the government prosecuted him for knowingly possessing a gun in his home while being an unlawful user of a controlled substance, under a section of the Gun Control Act of 1968. But Ali moved to dismiss the indictment, citing his Second Amendment rights.
“The government considers Mr. Hemani an unlawful user of a controlled substance because he admits to using marijuana about every other day. But how much marijuana does Mr. Hemani use, in what potency, and to what effect? Is he routinely unable to manage his affairs, a risk to himself or his family? Or does he use a mild gummy as a sleep aid a few times a week? We do not know and, the government says, it doesn’t matter. The government asks us to analogize him to a habitual drunkard all the same,” Gorsuch wrote. The “habitual drunkard” designation comes from historical laws limiting the rights of alcoholics, which the prosecution used to support its case.
“And, apart from pointing to habitual drunkard laws, the government has not even attempted to prove that any other specific historical principle might justify its prosecution in this case,” Gorsuch wrote.
“Nor does the government’s theory stop at Mr. Hemani. It extends equally to a husband who regularly takes his wife’s prescription Ambien to sleep and a college student who routinely uses a friend’s Adderall to cram for exams,” Gorsuch wrote.
Lower courts had dismissed the Hemani case, but government prosecutors wanted the Supreme Court to hear the case.
The case is similar to the one that ended in a conviction for Hunter Biden, the son of former President Joe Biden. In 2024, a jury convicted Hunter Biden for being addicted to drugs while possessing a firearm under the same law. Biden’s attorneys also argued the prosecution violated his Second Amendment rights, but the judge rejected that argument. His father later pardoned him.
This week in Washington
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters about restoring commercial fishing access to areas of the Pacific during a signing ceremony in the Oval Office of the White House on Thursday. Photo by Jim Lo Scalzo/UPI | License Photo
