Two recent federal appeals court rulings are reshaping how judges evaluate firearm restrictions for marijuana users, signaling a potential constitutional turning point.
In United States v. Harrison from the 10th Circuit and Florida Commissioner of Agriculture v. Attorney General from the 11th Circuit, appellate judges applied the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen framework, which requires gun regulations to align with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm laws. The approach has posed unique problems for the federal ban on firearm ownership by marijuana users under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), since few historical analogues exist for categorically disarming people based on substance use.
The Harrison case centered on an Oklahoma man pulled over while sober but found with marijuana and a loaded revolver. The 10th Circuit ruled that prosecutors must show marijuana users present an individualized risk of danger, rather than assuming all are unfit for gun ownership.
The 11th Circuit went even further. The case involved medical marijuana patients denied the ability to buy or keep firearms. Rejecting comparisons to felons or “dangerous individuals,” the court stressed that misdemeanants historically have not been stripped of gun rights and that rational, controlled medical marijuana use does not equate to addiction or violence. The case was sent back to the trial court for reconsideration.
Both decisions reflect a shift away from categorical bans and toward individualized assessments. The Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling in Rahimi reaffirmed that courts may disarm people deemed genuine threats, but not entire classes of citizens without specific findings.
Meanwhile, enforcement challenges complicate the federal stance. States that have legalized marijuana often decline to enforce federal prohibition, citing the anti-commandeering doctrine. Combined with congressional limits on federal interference in medical marijuana programs, this leaves federal agencies with limited capacity to prosecute gun violations tied to marijuana use.
The rulings deepen a circuit split, with the 3rd Circuit striking down similar bans while the 8th Circuit upholds them. Growing inconsistencies may soon push the Supreme Court to intervene. Until then, marijuana users with firearms remain in a legally precarious position—protected in some jurisdictions but at risk of prosecution in others.
Read the whole article from Reason.org here.
