The Supreme Court on Thursday loosened the country’s restrictions on regular marijuana users and their gun rights in a unanimous decision.
In the 9-0 ruling, the justices sided with a Texas man in United States v. Hemani, that the law banning people who use marijuana cannot legally own guns.
Ali Danail Hemani was charged with a felony because he acknowledged to regularly using marijuana while allegedly having a gun in his home. His lawyers were able to get his felony charge thrown out after a lower court found the ban on the use of illegal drugs by gun owners was unconstitutional.
The justices heard oral arguments in the case in March after being urged by the Trump administration to take the case. The Department of Justice appealed the ruling from a lower court.
The ruling, authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, doesn’t overturn the ban on illegal drug use for gun owners, but it makes it harder for prosecutors to invoke it.
Gorsuch noted the ruling was a “narrow one” because it doesn’t address issues about addicts and focuses on casual drug use and firearms.
The court acknowledged that drugs and guns can “sometimes make for a dangerous mix” but likened casual marijuana use to that of alcohol use. Under certain circumstances and use frequency, the justices argued that “marijuana use today is like alcohol use at the founding.”
“It is widespread and increasingly considered socially acceptable in many quarters. And from a practical standpoint, law enforcement widely tolerates the use of marijuana,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in a concurring opinion. Justice Elena Kagan also wrote a concurring opinion.
Alito highlighted how marijuana consumption is “increasingly common” in the United States, and several states have legalized the use and sale of it. Despite possession of the drug still being a federal crime, very few people are convicted of that each year. Alito noted that the government has largely tolerated the production and sale of marijuana.
The similarities between current day marijuana use and alcohol consumption at the founding of the nation show that the federal government doesn’t have an argument to stand on, Alito argued.
The FBI found a handgun, marijuana and cocaine when they searched Hemani’s home after being suspicious of his travel and alleged communication with links to Iran.
During oral arguments earlier this year, the federal government faced tough questioning from the court’s more liberal justices, including Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who raised the issue about someone being homeless and a gun owner.
She also questioned the government’s argument over “habitual” drug users, arguing that it’s broad and could be implemented differently for different types of drugs. Sotomayor wondered about different drugs like Ambien.
Gorsuch invokes alcohol use by Founding Fathers
Gorsuch, who wrote the majority opinion, leaned heavily on the use of alcohol in the country’s early years, likening the Founding Fathers to “habitual drunkards.” He also highlighted marijuana’s multiple forms, including edibles and medically-prescribed use, and different state laws regarding the drug.
“What do we do with the fact that marijuana is sort of illegal but sort of isn’t and that the federal government itself is conflicted on this?” he questioned.
Hemani’s attorney sought to highlight how vague the government’s argument was, but she faced pushback from Chief Justice John Roberts about whether they were asking for the decision for gun ownership and drug use to be on a case-by-case basis. She faced some of her toughest questions from Alito, who, based on his concurring opinion Thursday, seemed to come around to her argument.
Last December, President Donald Trump rescheduled marijuana from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug, something Hemani’s team relied on in their argument to the court.
Gorsuch, in the unanimous decision, highlighted that move and how the country is becoming more on board with the use of the drug nationally. He noted that some surveys show American adults may be using marijuana at higher rates than alcohol in recent years. Should the government’s argument win out in this case, it would suggest that millions of Americans who regularly use marijuana are “categorically and unusually dangerous,” Gorsuch said.