The Supreme Court will consider whether people who regularly smoke marijuana can legally own guns, the latest firearm case to come before the court since its 2022 decision expanding gun rights
The case in front of SCOTUS is not about implementing a new restriction. It is about if a long standing restriction on the unrelated use of controlled substances is a Constitutional violation. Weed is grabbing the headline, but the restriction applies to a vast range of substances.
I’m inclined to entirely agree though the abject hypocrisy (I know, par for the course of conservatives) will be through the roof if the individuals who staked their entire personality on “we can’t restrain gun ownership in any remote way because the plain-text of the constitution” find pot usage to be the only acceptable background check.
A wrinkle to this case is that Federally marijuana is in the most restricted category. It’s above meth or cocaine.
Obviously a lot of people consider those drugs more harmful than marijuana, but if we are playing the legal game then marijuana is legislated as being more dangerous and that’s what the court has to work with.
SCOTUS I think has to decide if controlled substance use as a whole can prohibit legally buying a gun or not. I’m not sure if they can just make a carveout for marijuana. (Also the person taking the case up had cocaine too, so it can’t not be brought up.)
You’d be surprised how many 2A people, who are across the political spectrum, are fine with removing that category of prohibition entirely. However I wonder if it will make SCOTUS more hesitant to make such an “extreme” ruling.
You are exactly right in how this law has been used. However, this case is looking to overturn that and set a precidedent for allowing marijuana users to own guns.
This sounds like an attempt to prevent black people from owning guns, in the same way a marijuana conviction has kept them from owning dispensaries.
I know white people smoke pot, but they don’t usually try to make laws to keep white people down in the same way.
The case in front of SCOTUS is not about implementing a new restriction. It is about if a long standing restriction on the unrelated use of controlled substances is a Constitutional violation. Weed is grabbing the headline, but the restriction applies to a vast range of substances.
Thank you for the clarification. I read this when I was half asleep.
I’m inclined to entirely agree though the abject hypocrisy (I know, par for the course of conservatives) will be through the roof if the individuals who staked their entire personality on “we can’t restrain gun ownership in any remote way because the plain-text of the constitution” find pot usage to be the only acceptable background check.
A wrinkle to this case is that Federally marijuana is in the most restricted category. It’s above meth or cocaine.
Obviously a lot of people consider those drugs more harmful than marijuana, but if we are playing the legal game then marijuana is legislated as being more dangerous and that’s what the court has to work with.
SCOTUS I think has to decide if controlled substance use as a whole can prohibit legally buying a gun or not. I’m not sure if they can just make a carveout for marijuana. (Also the person taking the case up had cocaine too, so it can’t not be brought up.)
You’d be surprised how many 2A people, who are across the political spectrum, are fine with removing that category of prohibition entirely. However I wonder if it will make SCOTUS more hesitant to make such an “extreme” ruling.
You are exactly right in how this law has been used. However, this case is looking to overturn that and set a precidedent for allowing marijuana users to own guns.