This Ping List is for all news pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from this Ping List.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Posted on 10/20/2025 10:51:16 AM PDT by Red Badger
Washington — The Supreme Court on Monday said it will decide whether a federal law that prohibits unlawful drug users from having firearms violates the Second Amendment, adding a second high-stakes case involving gun rights to the docket for its current term.
The Justice Department is urging the high court to uphold the prohibition, arguing that there are "narrow circumstances" in which the government may burden the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. A federal appeals court ruled that the law is unconstitutional in most cases, and the Trump administration said that decision should be reversed.
In agreeing to take up the Justice Department's appeal, the Supreme Court is adding another gun rights dispute to its docket this term. It will also decide whether states can prohibit concealed-carry permit holders from bringing their handguns onto private property open to the public.
The law at issue in the case is the latest longstanding firearm restriction to come under legal scrutiny in the years since the Supreme Court ruled in 2022 that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a firearm in public. In that landmark decision, the high court laid out a new standard for evaluating the constitutionality of gun restrictions focusing on the nation's history and tradition of firearms regulation.
Since then, the Supreme Court has been asked to decide the constitutionality of state bans on assault weapons, as well as federal laws barring felons and people subject to domestic violence restraining orders from having guns. The high court in 2024 upheld the restriction targeting alleged domestic abusers, but has turned away the other cases.
But the legal battles have continued to make their way to the Supreme Court, including over a provision of the 1968 Gun Control Act that prohibits a person "who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance" from having a gun.
The same restriction drew attention after Hunter Biden, former President Joe Biden's son, was convicted last year for knowingly having a gun while he was addicted to illegal drugs. Biden pardoned his son in December, weeks before he left office.
The case before the high court involves Ali Danial Hemani, a dual citizen of the U.S. and Pakistan, who the government says is a drug dealer who also uses cocaine and marijuana, among other substances. During a search of Hemani's family home in Texas, FBI agents found a 9 mm pistol, marijuana and cocaine. He was indicted by a federal grand jury in 2023 for violating the drug-user-in-possession prohibition, related to what prosecutors said was his "habitual" use of marijuana.
Hemani sought to have the indictment tossed out on the ground that the law violates the Second Amendment as applied to him, and a district court ordered it to be dismissed. While his case was proceeding, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled in two other similar challenges that the prohibition is unconstitutional.
In one of those cases, involving a "nonviolent, marijuana-smoking gunowner," the 5th Circuit found that "our history and tradition do not support disarming a sober person based solely on past substance usage," but may support "some limits on a presently intoxicated person's right to carry a weapon."
It went on to rule in Hemani's favor in light of that 2024 ruling.
The Trump administration appealed that decision to the Supreme Court and wrote that the 5th Circuit was wrong to find that the Second Amendment precludes Congress from keeping habitual drug users from having firearms.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that the firearms ban for illegal drug users complies with the Second Amendment, since it targets a category of people "who pose a clear danger of misusing firearms: habitual users of unlawful drugs." He argued that the law prohibits gun possession temporarily — anyone who stops habitually using illegal substances can have firearms.
"The habitual drug user, in other words, always has the option of restoring his own right to keep and bear arms by simply forgoing the habitual use of unlawful drugs," Sauer wrote. "But if he lacks the motivation or will to comply with the law because of addiction or other factors, that fact alone provides powerful evidence of society's interest in keeping him disarmed."
Sauer compared the law to founding-era measures restricting the rights of drunkards, or those who abused alcohol habitually. He also noted that legislatures have been prohibiting drug addicts or users from having guns since the 1920s and 1930s. More than 30 states have laws barring drug users or addicts from possessing firearms.
Hemani's lawyers urged the Supreme Court to turn his case away, arguing that the 5th Circuit's decision is "exceedingly narrow."
Ping!...............
If they can vote, they sure as hell can carry a gun.
He shouldn't be allowed guns because HE IS A DRUG DEALER.
He should also be forced to choose a country for citizenship. It should be universally illegal to vote in two countries.
“”””The case before the high court involves Ali Danial Hemani, a dual citizen of the U.S. and Pakistan, who the government says is a drug dealer who also uses cocaine and marijuana, among other substances. During a search of Hemani’s family home in Texas, FBI agents found a 9 mm pistol, marijuana and cocaine. He was indicted by a federal grand jury in 2023 for violating the drug-user-in-possession prohibition, related to what prosecutors said was his “habitual” use of marijuana.””””
I find that anyone’s rights are removed without due process is very troubling.
This Ping List is for all news pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from this Ping List.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Not good. The Supreme Court does not like criminals and drug dealers.
This is not a great developement for restoring Second Amendment rights.
The Trump administration should have let the decision ride.
Law barring illegal drug users from having guns.
If so there goes more of the democrat base.
Good deal all around
If the accused is a threat to others, charge him and lock him up. If not, his right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
An abundance of due process here.
Oh, yes, Hunter was charged. And convicted. Then pardoned.
I’ll bet if you look at the statistics of drug use and crimes associated with firearms, you may find a correlation.
Illegal drug users are just another group of criminals...
Proven use means no guns allowed...
So the court’s are gonna decide if meth & heroin addicts can own guns?⁶
This also applies to states where cannabis is legal.The Fed says no the states say yes. It’s both a tenth amendment issue and a 2nd ad. As well.
The second is pretty clese “shall not be infringed” if someone is too dangerous to own a firearm they are also too dangerous to be walking around society at all. Same for felons you either are back to being a functional member of society or not ,if not then you should still be locked up or executed by the state of a lifetime danger like.serial killers and pedorapists
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.