2A Coalition Files Brief in Gun Ban for Marijuana Users Case

January 30, 2026
2:41 pm

▶

Listen to Article

In a bold strike against one of the most absurd federal gun restrictions on the books, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed a critical amicus brief in a landmark case challenging the lifetime firearm ban imposed on marijuana users. This isn't just legalese—it's a direct assault on 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), the archaic law that strips gun rights from anyone who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance, including cannabis. With recreational and medical marijuana now legal in over half the states and public opinion shifting dramatically (polls show 70%+ support nationwide), SAF's move spotlights the hypocrisy: you're fine voting, driving, or serving on a jury while puffing legally in your state, but Uncle Sam says no AR-15 for you. The case, building on U.S. v. Rahimi's recent scrutiny of disarming categories of people, argues this ban fails modern Second Amendment tests under Bruen, where the government must prove historical analogs—not just wave the drug war flag. The implications for the 2A community are massive, potentially unlocking rights for 20-30 million Americans who use cannabis without a whiff of violence. Think about it: this ban has ensnared hunters, sport shooters, and everyday carriers who test positive on a federal form, turning routine NICS checks into loyalty tests to the DEA's outdated playbook. SAF's brief, joined by a coalition of pro-2A heavyweights, cleverly frames it as viewpoint discrimination—punishing a lawful activity in most jurisdictions while ignoring data showing no spike in gun crimes among users. If victorious, this could cascade into challenges against other prohibited persons categories, like non-violent felons or the mentally ill, forcing courts to ditch 1968 Gun Control Act relics for evidence-based scrutiny. It's a masterclass in incrementalism: win here, and the dominoes of disarmament start toppling. For gun owners, this is a rallying cry—support SAF, stay vocal, and watch the oral arguments. The feds' house of cards is wobbling; a pro-2A Supreme Court could redefine shall not be infringed for the 21st century. If you're in a green state feeling the squeeze, this fight is yours. Stay locked and loaded on updates—victory smells like freedom, not prohibition.

Best FFL Software Ranked and Compared!

The implications for the 2A community are massive, potentially unlocking rights for 20-30 million Americans who use cannabis without a whiff of violence. Think about it: this ban has ensnared hunters, sport shooters, and everyday carriers who test positive on a federal form, turning routine NICS checks into loyalty tests to the DEA’s outdated playbook. SAF’s brief, joined by a coalition of pro-2A heavyweights, cleverly frames it as viewpoint discrimination—punishing a lawful activity in most jurisdictions while ignoring data showing no spike in gun crimes among users. If victorious, this could cascade into challenges against other prohibited persons categories, like non-violent felons or the mentally ill, forcing courts to ditch 1968 Gun Control Act relics for evidence-based scrutiny. It’s a masterclass in incrementalism: win here, and the dominoes of disarmament start toppling.

For gun owners, this is a rallying cry—support SAF, stay vocal, and watch the oral arguments. The feds’ house of cards is wobbling; a pro-2A Supreme Court could redefine shall not be infringed for the 21st century. If you’re in a green state feeling the squeeze, this fight is yours. Stay locked and loaded on updates—victory smells like freedom, not prohibition.

Share this story