Supremes Take on Gun Possession for Drug Abusers – Update for October 29, 2025

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

SCOTUS TO DECIDE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF 18 USC 922(g)(3)

The Supreme Court decided last week to address a multi-circuit conflict over whether 18 USC § 922(g)(3) – that prevents anyone “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in 21 USC § 802)” — including marijuana, which most states have legalized in some fashion — from possessing guns or ammo.

By accepting the petition for certiorari filed last June by the Dept of Justice, the high court will examine a 5th Circuit decision that allowed Texas resident Ali Hemani to possess firearms regardless of his marijuana use.

Ali, an alleged regular marijuana user, was charged with a subsection (g)(3) violation after agents searched his home and found cocaine, marijuana and a Glock 19.

The 5th Circuit found (g)(3) unconstitutional in most cases and said it could be government has urged the justices to uphold the statute because habitual drug users with firearms presented “unique dangers to society” and raised the prospect of “armed, hostile encounters with police officers.”

The case will require the justices to apply the court’s test for examining challenges to gun control measures under the 2nd Amendment flowing from New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn v. Bruen. The test requires courts to strike down such laws unless they are “consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

The Supreme Court limited the sweep of Bruen when it found last year in United States v. Rahimi that the government could take guns away from people subject to restraining orders for domestic violence.

In its petition, DOJ noted that Ali was caught with cocaine as well as weed and that he made other incriminating statements to the cops. The government also emphasized allegations that Ali is a dual US and Pakistani citizen, had ties to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and went to Iran to honor Iranian general Qasem Soleimani, killed by a US drone strike. The government claimed Ali’s mother was seen on video saying she hoped her sons would become martyrs for Iran.

In response, Ali called those accusations “non germane,” which, of course, they are. “The limited allegations set forth in the indictment should be the only facts before the Court,” Ali’s attorneys argued.

Focusing on the present dangerousness of drug users – and note that the statute doesn’t prevent alcohol abusers or those suffering from substance use disorder from lawfully prescribed controlled substances – could have substantial implications for the decision on 18 USC 922(g)(1) that is surely coming.

Some observers think that SCOTUS may have set up Ali Hemani to lose. “There are plenty of other cases involving more sympathetic defendants, like medical marijuana users with no criminal record or documented ties to terrorist groups,” law professor Dru Stevenson told The Reload. “If the Court just wanted to let pot smokers have guns, they could have picked one of those appeals. Instead, they picked someone caught with cocaine, who made a number of other incriminating statements to police, and who made incriminating statements in text messages legally retrieved from his phone.”

“So, while it’s extremely early to be drawing any conclusions with a high degree of certainty, The Reload said, there’s a clear path to the court making a very narrow holding applicable to Ali’s facts and no others:  “SCOTUS could easily uphold the federal drug user gun prohibition as applied only to the facts of Hemani’s case. And those facts probably don’t match the ones many other gun owners are likely to face, including those who regularly smoke weed. If the Court holds that Hemani is dangerous enough to disarm because there’s evidence he deals hard drugs and has collaborated with a foreign terrorist organization in addition to using marijuana regularly,” The Reload said, “that probably doesn’t tell us a whole lot other than that SCOTUS doesn’t believe the historical record requires people to be actively intoxicated in order to lose their gun rights–as the lower court held.”

In addition to several perfect § 922(g)(3) petitions the Court elected to overlook, the perfect § 922(g)(1) petition – Vincent v United States – is awaiting SCOTUS review. The fact that the Court has not taken the petition up in conference for two months since it was ripe for action suggests that the Court may defer action on 922(g)(1) until a (g)(3) decision is rendered.

Law360, High Court To Hear Case Asking If Drug Users Can Have Guns (October 20, 2025)

The Hill, Supreme Court to decide if drug users can carry guns (October 20, 2025)

New York Times, Supreme Court Will Weigh Gun Restrictions for Drug Users (October 20, 2025)

Vincent v. United States, Case No. 24-1155 (petition filed May 8, 2025)

The Reload, Analysis: Will the New SCOTUS Second Amendment Cases Produce Relatively Little Movement? (October 26, 2025)

~ Thomas L. Root