By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
The Second Amendment Foundation and five other gun rights organizations have filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to accept a case challenging the federal ban on gun possession and ownership by persons who use marijuana.
The case is known as Harris v. United States and the brief asks that this case be considered alongside another drug-related gun case which the high court accepted earlier this month. That case is known as United States v. Hemani.
SAF is joined by the California Rifle & Pistol Association, Second Amendment Law Center, Operation Blazing Sword–Pink Pistols, Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus and Minnesota Gun Owners Law Center. Their 24-page brief was submitted by attorneys C.D. Michel and Anna M. Barvir at Michel & Associates in Long Beach, Calif., and Konstadinos T. Moros, SAF Counsel of Record. Moros is SAF’s director of Legal Research and Education.
In their brief, the coalition of gun rights organizations notes, “While drugs like fentanyl, heroin, and methamphetamine have not gained any widespread social acceptance and are extremely dangerous and addictive, marijuana by contrast is legal in two dozen states even for recreational use (and legal in another 16 for medicinal use).”
They offer statistics showing public opinion supports the notion that marijuana use “should be legal for medical and recreational purposes, while roughly a third (32%) say that marijuana should be legal for medical use only.” Only 11 percent think pot should not be legal. It is currently considered a controlled substance under federal law, which is how many people find themselves in trouble with the law.
Then subject of the case, Erik Harris, is an admitted marijuana user who, according to a ruling by the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, was charged after he claimed on a Form 4473 that he did not use pot when he purchased handguns on three separate occasions. He had moved to dismiss the charges, according to the Third Circuit opinion, which upheld his conviction.
“The Third Circuit’s ruling defies Bruen and Rahimi by upholding a lifetime disarmament of sober citizens who occasionally use a substance – marijuana – that is now legal to various extents in 40 states and socially accepted by a supermajority of Americans,” said SAF Director of Legal Research and Education Kostas Moros in a prepared statement. “History shows that Founding-era laws addressed the danger of mixing alcohol and firearms by temporarily disarming the actively intoxicated, never by stripping gun rights from anyone who simply drank in moderation. The Third Circuit ignored this close historical analogue and instead relied on remote comparisons to laws disarming the ‘furiously mad.’ We urge the Court to intervene and restore the proper Bruen framework.”
“This case is critical because it affects millions of law-abiding Americans who face losing their Second Amendment rights simply for using a substance legal in their state – often for medical reasons,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “SAF is also challenging a firearms purchase ban by medical marijuana card holders in Greene v. Bondi, and we feel it’s an important issue that warrants the Supreme Court’s intervention.”
