The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in United States v. Hemani, challenging a federal law that prohibits unlawful drug users from possessing firearms. Justices from both conservative and liberal sides expressed skepticism about the statute's broad application, particularly to marijuana users. The case stems from a 2022 incident involving Ali Danial Hemani, who was convicted after admitting to frequent marijuana use.
On Monday, March 2, 2026, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in United States v. Hemani, the first major Second Amendment case since the 2022 Bruen decision. The case examines whether a federal statute criminalizing gun possession by unlawful drug users violates the Constitution. Lower courts, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, had struck down Hemani's conviction, ruling the law unconstitutional as applied to him, a frequent marijuana user.
Hemani's legal issues began in 2022 when federal agents searched his family home for evidence of ties to a Middle Eastern terrorist group. Although no such evidence was found, agents discovered a legally purchased 9-millimeter pistol, 60 grams of marijuana, and a small amount of cocaine. Hemani admitted to using marijuana several times a week, leading to his conviction under the statute, which mirrors the one used in the prosecution of Hunter Biden.
During arguments, justices questioned the law's historical basis under Bruen, which requires modern gun regulations to have founding-era analogues. Justice Neil Gorsuch noted that founding fathers like John Adams, who drank hard cider daily, and James Madison, who consumed whiskey, retained their arms rights. He contrasted this with disarming modern marijuana users, especially as the drug is legal in many states and faces potential federal rescheduling from Schedule 1 to Schedule 3.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised concerns about the statute's vague definition of an "unlawful drug user," asking if it could apply to someone using a spouse's Ambien or a student's roommate's Adderall. Principal Deputy Solicitor General Sarah Harris conceded such scenarios could lead to prosecution, though rare. Barrett probed for evidence linking marijuana use to dangerousness, a key factor for Second Amendment restrictions.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned mens rea requirements in states where marijuana is legal, while Justice Elena Kagan highlighted Bruen's emphasis on historical judgments over modern legislative ones. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed frustration with crediting congressional drug classifications post-Bruen.
Hemani's attorney, Erin Murphy, focused arguments on marijuana's quasi-legal status and lack of proven dangerousness, avoiding broader drug discussions. Justices appeared united against the law's overbreadth, potentially sparing non-dangerous users like marijuana consumers, though outcomes for harder drug users remain unclear. The court is expected to issue an opinion later in 2026.
