ACLU attorneys are challenging the constitutionality of the federal ban on gun ownership for marijuana consumers (18 U.S.C. §922(g)(3)) in the Supreme Court case *U.S. v. Hemani*, arguing the statute is vague, lacks historical precedent, and is outdated given state legalization trends and the federal government's move to reschedule cannabis. This case, which is set for oral arguments on March 2, comes amid a growing conflict among federal circuit courts over the Second Amendment rights of cannabis users.

ACLU Tells Supreme Court Trump’s Rescheduling Makes Gun Ban for Cannabis Users Outdated

Jan 26, 2026

Source:

Kyle Jaeger

Marijuana Moment

The legal battle over the federal ban on gun ownership for cannabis consumers is heading to the Supreme Court, and the timing couldn't be more interesting. ACLU attorneys are representing Ali Danial Hemani, challenging a law that bars anyone who uses marijuana from owning a firearm. They argue the statute is unconstitutionally vague and out of step with a country where 40 states have legalized use. Plus, with the federal government actively moving to reschedule cannabis, the ACLU points out that the government itself no longer views marijuana as a high-risk substance comparable to heroin.

This case is a massive deal for the community because it addresses the "second-class citizen" status often forced upon tokers. For too long, responsible adults have had to choose between their medicine and their constitutional rights. A win here would mean more than just gun rights; it would be a major step toward normalizing cannabis use and ensuring that enjoying a plant doesn't automatically strip you of your legal protections. It's about time the law caught up to reality.