Nope smokers not allowed

[Irrelevant]

United States v. Hemani

www.scotusblog.com

I believe the feds are arguing that smoking weed or taking a prescription pill you don't have an active subscription for means you shouldn't own guns... See the most recent response by the feds.

Maybe I'm misreading it

 

[Nick87]

When pot became legal here. Everyone was saying that you couldn't hold both a concealed carry and medical marijauna permit. Everyone said it was a state thing but I'm pretty sure it is federal.

 

[Rack Daniels]

I would argue that having a firearm AND a plastic card that says I MAY possess cannabis is not cannabis itself, and therefore could not be in violation of any law. Now, a bonafide sack of doja while you carry? That’s “a crime”.

I won’t inject my opinion on the matter…

 

[SAJ-99]

I thought maybe there was a decision, but not yet it seems. The most recent arguments sound like they could have been entertaining.

“On Monday, Principal Deputy Solicitor General Sarah Harris tried to pass the Court’s historical test by arguing that a few 18th-century state laws restricting drunkards from using guns empower the federal government to prevent marijuana users like Hemani from owning a gun. In order to figure out whether a prohibition on drug users possessing guns passed in 1968 is still legal in 2026, the Court spent oral argument pondering how drunk the Founding Fathers got in 1776.”