Posted on 10/20/2025 11:26:55 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
According to federal law, anyone “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” is prohibited from possessing a firearm
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a case on drug users possessing firearms to determine whether the federal law criminalizing such possession is unconstitutional.
The Trump administration urged the court to hear the case, making it the latest regarding the Second Amendment that the court agreed to hear this term, according to The Hill news outlet. The court is expected to rule on the case by the end of its term next summer.
According to federal law, anyone “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” is prohibited from possessing a firearm. Violating the law carries up to 10 years in prison.
“This is the archetypal case for this Court’s review,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in court filings.
The court's decision will impact federal and similar state-level measures that the Justice Department says have been implemented in more than 30 states.
Since the Supreme Court’s expansion of gun rights in 2022, lower court judges have split on the federal crime’s constitutionality.
The high court's 2022 decision requires gun control measures to be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Some judges have since ruled the federal law unconstitutional in at least some applications.
Last year, the Supreme Court ruled a similar federal law that criminalizes gun possession for people under domestic violence restraining orders was constitutional.
The high court’s announcement comes after it ran out of funding over the weekend due to the government shutdown. The court building is now closed to the public, but the justices’ work on pending cases is continuing to proceed as normal.
(Excerpt) Read more at justthenews.com ...
“According to federal law, anyone “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” is prohibited from possessing a firearm”
Offhand I think the court will find the law is too broad. Not that it isn’t a valid goal to keep firearms from being in the wrong hands but does a one time arrest/conviction for use of a controlled substance mean a life time ban? There is also the matter of how addiction is defined and who makes the decision.
I think the law gives way too much discretion to the government in deciding who should be prohibited from having a firearm and this means that decision could be more political than practical. JMHO
Unlawful user or addicted. If that’s all the law sets out, adding dealer or trafficker is an expansion.
Wonder what they will do about this population?
Although police officers are meant to uphold and follow the law, that does not make them impervious to falling under the grasp of addiction like anyone else. In fact, substance use disorders are estimated to be between 20 and 30% among police, compared to under 10% among the general population.
5th: nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
The 5th and 14th both use the phrase “due process of law”.
What is due process of law?
A) Is Due Process when a specific individual is determined not eligible to exercise the 5th? or
B) is Due Process when a general statement not specific to an individual is issued. Eg Blacks, or youth, or accused or _ _ _ _ cannot exercise the 5th? or
C) Other _ _ _ _ _
5th: nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
The 5th and 14th both use the phrase “due process of law”.
What is due process of law?
A) Is Due Process when a specific individual is determined not eligible to exercise the 5th? or
B) is Due Process when a general statement not specific to an individual is issued. Eg Blacks, or youth, or accused or _ _ _ _ cannot exercise the 5th? or
C) Other _ _ _ _ _
5th: nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
The 5th and 14th both use the phrase “due process of law”.
What is due process of law?
A) Is Due Process when a specific individual is determined not eligible to exercise the 5th? or
B) is Due Process when a general statement not specific to an individual is issued. Eg Blacks, or youth, or accused or _ _ _ _ cannot exercise the 5th? or
C) Other _ _ _ _ _
“Not that it isn’t a valid goal to keep firearms from being in the wrong hands but does a one time arrest/conviction for use of a controlled substance mean a life time ban?”
So would it follow that a one time DV conviction mean the same? Especially since the ruling on DV restraining orders?
Well, how many offenses are too many? Decided if you want guns or drugs, pick one. Then again if you do this once and clean your act up there’s nothing to prevent you from having a court expunged the offense.
Bullshit!!! Alcohol is way more dangerous than smoking weed. I think yall sound like democRATS in here !! put your little tags on whether a person has a right to carry, FU!!!!!!!!!!!!
How many offenses is too many? That is one thing any law concerning the issue should clarify.
I believe it should. Especially since DV laws can and have been (I hate to use the word here) abused by dishonest people. I think too the law applies only to felony convictions for DV. I don’t know if there is such a distinction in the law under discussion.
Brief take. My opinion is that laws should presume a right to bear arms as given in the 2nd amendment. The burden to take away that right must lie with the government. The burden should not lie with the gun owner to prove he should preserve that right.
lol, ok it’s time to go back to DU now
Well I think that’s implied…once and you’re out.
Scientific studies and data show that alcohol is significantly more dangerous to the community than cannabis in several key areas. However, it is important to note that cannabis is not harmless, and both substances carry risks, especially for vulnerable populations such as adolescents and pregnant women.
Here is a comparison of the community impacts of alcohol and cannabis:
Violence and aggression
Alcohol: Research repeatedly shows a strong link between alcohol use and aggressive or violent behavior. A 2013 Nevada Legislature report cited that 25–30% of violent crimes in the United States are linked to alcohol use. Alcohol is also a major contributing factor to domestic violence and sexual assault.
Cannabis: Studies have found the opposite effect with cannabis use, which is not associated with violence. Some research even suggests that cannabis may reduce aggression during intoxication.
Harm to others
Alcohol: A study in Washington state found that harms attributed to others’ drinking were much more common than those from others’ cannabis use. Alcohol-related harms included family problems, harassment, and physical harm.
Cannabis: While secondhand cannabis smoke poses health risks, especially to children, studies have shown that its societal harms are far less prevalent than those of alcohol.
Addiction and dependence
Alcohol: The potential for addiction is significantly higher for alcohol. About 15% of people who try alcohol will eventually develop dependence. Alcohol withdrawal can also be physically dangerous and fatal in severe cases.
Cannabis: While some users can develop a cannabis use disorder, it is less addictive than alcohol. A 1994 survey found that about 9% of people who have tried cannabis will develop an addiction. Physical withdrawal is not found in cannabis use.
Overdose risk
Alcohol: It is possible and common to die from an alcohol overdose or poisoning. According to the CDC, there are over 1,600 alcohol poisoning deaths each year in the U.S..
Cannabis: A fatal overdose from cannabis is virtually impossible. Research indicates it would require a theoretical dose thousands of times greater than a typical recreational dose to be lethal.
Driving impairment
Alcohol: Driving with a blood alcohol level of just 0.05% significantly increases the risk of a car crash by 575%.
Cannabis: Driving under the influence of cannabis is also dangerous. However, the overall crash risk is less pronounced compared to alcohol. The most significant driving risk is when cannabis and alcohol are used in combination.
Long-term health effects
Alcohol: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) attributes tens of thousands of deaths each year to the long-term effects of alcohol, which can cause liver disease, heart disease, certain cancers, and brain damage.
Cannabis: While cannabis smoke can harm lungs and heavy use in adolescence has been linked to mental health and cognitive issues, the overall mortality and disease burden are significantly lower than for alcohol.
Conclusion
Based on scientific evidence, alcohol poses a much greater public health and safety risk to the community than cannabis across a range of metrics, including addiction, overdose, violence, and disease burden. However, cannabis is not without risks, and responsible use is important, especially concerning youth development, mental health, and driving safety.
Why do you say that?
Settle down, poth heed.
It’s also illegal to possess a firearm while intoxicated with alcohol.
The SC is looking at whether or not drug users should be prohibited from possessing firearms. That’s a win for drug users.
I for one, welcome our new armed crack head overlords.
Just wait until the gun grabbing peeps schedule caffeine as a controlled substance.
Thank You for that “Excellent Take” on that matter.
Inalienable rights should be given very broad purview over legislative rules.
Thanks for your kind words. I am glad someone else sees it that way.
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.