Ali Hemani, a Texas man who uses marijuana "a few times a week" and also owns firearms, will not face federal prosecution under a statute that could have sent him to prison for up to 15 years after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the law is unconstitutional as applied to his case.
Background
Hemani was charged with violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), a federal statute prohibiting gun ownership by individuals who are "unlawful users of or addicted to any controlled substance." The government pursued the case despite not alleging that Hemani was a drug addict, had ever posed a danger to himself or others, or had done anything with his firearm other than possess it in his home.
The case drew immediate comparisons to the prosecution of Hunter Biden, who faced charges under the same statute for possessing a firearm while allegedly using drugs. President Joe Biden later pardoned his son before he was sentenced.
Hemani's case reached the Supreme Court after lower courts struggled to apply the court's landmark 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which established that firearms regulations must be consistent with "the Nation's tradition of firearm regulation."
The Investigation
Writing for an eight-justice majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch held that the government's attempt to prosecute Hemani was not "consistent with the Second Amendment." The court rejected the government's argument that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) was constitutionally valid because "habitual drunkard laws" were historically rooted in American law.
"No matter that the government did not assert Mr. Hemani was a drug addict," Gorsuch wrote. "No matter that it did not contend his drug use had ever led him to pose a danger to himself or others."
The majority concluded that "analogy fails under every measure it asks us to consider" because historical laws targeting habitual drunkenness "targeted different kinds of people, did so for different reasons, and operated in different ways." Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenter.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson joined the majority opinion but penned a separate concurrence, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, that directly challenged the conservative legal framework established in Bruen. Jackson argued that the "history and tradition" test has proven unworkable and should be abandoned.
Key Takeaways
- Hemani faced up to 15 years in federal prison under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) for possessing firearms while using marijuana a few times per week
- The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that the prosecution was unconstitutional, with only Justice Thomas dissenting
- Justice Jackson called on the court to "retire the failed Bruen experiment" and return to means-end scrutiny analysis
- Justice Alito wrote separately that "marijuana use today is like alcohol use at the founding" and is "increasingly considered socially acceptable"
What's Next
The ruling likely ends Hemani's prosecution, but legal experts expect the decision to impact future cases involving the intersection of drug use and Second Amendment rights. The Biden administration's Justice Department had defended the statute, which remains on the books for other applications.
Lower courts will now need guidance on how to apply Thursday's ruling to factually similar cases involving recreational marijuana users who possess firearms.