So here is a bit from an earlier article that puts a little more color on what the court case is about:
FDACS Commissioner Nicole Fried says the federal government’s “irrational, inconsistent, and incoherent federal marijuana policy” undermines Florida’s medical marijuana and firearms laws and prevents her from ensuring Floridians’ related state rights.
According to the complaint, two sections of the federal criminal code forbid Florida residents who qualify as medical marijuana patients from possessing or purchasing a firearm.
These sections are unconstitutional, and they prevent residents from exercising their Second Amendment rights, the commissioner says, and it prevents the full implementation of Florida’s medical marijuana program.
Additionally, the challenged sections “embodies the contradictory nature of the United States’ marijuana policy,” according to the plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs Vera Cooper, Nicole Hansell and Neill Franklin have all been affected by the relevant sections of the federal criminal code, according to the complaint.
Cooper and Hansell are Florida residents and medical marijuana patients. Both wish to purchase firearms for personal protection in their homes and elsewhere but cannot due to the current law, according to the complaint.
Franklin is a Florida resident, a retired law enforcement officer, and a firearm owner. The complaint states that a qualifying physician prescribed him medical marijuana for a qualifying medical condition, but Franklin chose not to participate because he did not want to give up his Second Amendment rights.
The plaintiffs state that they do not challenge the federal government’s right to enact firearms regulations, but that the challenged sections and regulations are unconstitutional.
“Those provisions, as applied to state-law-abiding medical marijuana patients, such as Cooper and Hansell, and those reasonably seeking to participate in the state medical marijuana program, such as Franklin, offer no protection to the public,” the complaint states. “They also place an inappropriate and severe burden on the constitutional rights of those affected.”
Read more at: https://www.law360.com/articles/1486149?copied=1
It does not give me comfort that our rights are being argued by Fried, who is an avowed gun control advocate.
Interesting we have not heard about this issue in California, Oregon, Washington, Washington DC, and all the other States that have medical and recreational marijuana.
But then again it’s hard to pay attention to all the news when you’re stoned.
Excellent points.
Do medical marijuana patients still have the right to speak as they wish, read what they want and go to church? Are these people allowed to peacefully assemble, are they immune from illegal search and seizure? Can the military arbitrarily decide to quarter troops in their homes? Do they have the right to a jury trial of their peers?
Or is it only the 2nd Amendment that appears to be arbitrarily granted or denied; as the court sees fit?