A federal appeals court has ruled to protect the gun rights of cannabis users in a case filed by medical cannabis patients to challenge the government’s ban on firearms purchases by individuals who use the plant. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that denying the gun rights of citizens solely because they either possess or consume cannabis is not “consistent with this nation’s history and tradition of firearm regulation.”
The case was filed by a group of medical cannabis patients including former Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried, who now serves as a member of the board of directors for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML). Fried said the ruling is “a huge win for freedom.”
“No medical cannabis patient should have to choose between their rights to their medicine or their right to bear arms,” she added.
Suit Challenged Federal Gun Ban for Cannabis Users
The lawsuit challenged a decades-old federal government policy based on a 1968 law prohibiting an “unlawful user” of a federally controlled substance from possessing or purchasing a firearm, NORML noted in a report about the legal action. The policy effectively enacts a blanket ban on gun possession and purchases by individuals with any history of cannabis use, despite protections under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that guarantee the right to bear arms.
Members of the NORML legal committee, including attorneys Fried, David Holland, Greg Morse, and Joseph Bondy, filed an amicus brief in the case arguing that the federal ban on gun possession and purchases by cannabis users is unconstitutional.
“Neither the Founders, Framers, nor elected leaders of the United States, all of whom had intimate knowledge of the role of cannabis cultivation and consumption in the colonies and new nation, took any legislative action to disarm cannabis consumers of the right to bear arms.”
Joseph A. Bondy, chair of NORML’s board of directors, applauded the court’s August 20 ruling.
“This is a substantial win for patients and constitutional rights. This ruling makes plain what NORML has long argued: medical cannabis patients should not be treated as second-class citizens under the law.”
NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano also praised the appeals court’s decision in the case.
“Neither past nor current cannabis use should automatically preclude someone from legal protections explicitly provided by the US Constitution,” he said in a statement from the cannabis policy reform advocacy group. “Either the Supreme Court or Congress need to ultimately resolve this issue so that responsible cannabis consumers are no longer threatened with federal prison terms simply for exercising their 2nd Amendment rights.”
Separate Ruling Also Finds Gun Ban for Cannabis Users Unconstitutional
The ruling was followed only days later by a similar decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. The three-judge panel ruled on August 26 that the government must prove that people who use cannabis “pose a risk of future danger” to justify maintaining the ban on gun possession and purchases, according to a report from Marijuana Moment.
The appeals court agreed with a lower court ruling to dismiss an indictment against Jared Michael Harrison, who was charged in Oklahoma in 2022 after police discovered cannabis and a handgun in his vehicle during a traffic stop. The Department of Justice appealed that ruling, sending the case to the appeals court.
Federal government lawyers had argued that the prohibition is constitutional because it is consistent with bans on gun ownership by people with mental illness. The appeals court ruled, however, that the government cannot justify the prohibition based on that standard.
“We agree with the district court and Mr. Harrison. On the record before us, the government has not shown laws disarming the mentally ill are relevant historical analogues,” the court wrote. “The government suggests laws disarming the mentally ill reveal a principle that legislatures may disarm those who are not ‘responsible,’ ‘ordinary,’ or able to exercise ‘self-control.’ This analysis relies on constructs the Supreme Court has explicitly refused to endorse.”
The case has been returned to that lower court, which determined that the law banning “unlawful” users of cannabis from possessing firearms is unconstitutional.
Catch up on the latest cannabis news, and sign up for NuggMD's Weekly Sesh newsletter for the latest cannabis news, consumer tips, and recommendations.
The information in this article and any included images or charts are for educational purposes only. This information is neither a substitute for, nor does it replace, professional legal advice or medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. If you have any concerns or questions about laws, regulations, or your health, you should always consult with an attorney, physician or other licensed professional.
