As the U.S. Supreme Court considers a series of cases challenging the current ban on gun ownership by people who use marijuana, another federal appeals court has ruled in favor of medical cannabis patients who want to exercise their Second Amendment rights to possess firearms.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh District, in a opinion authored by Judge Elizabeth Branch, departed from the ruling of a district could that upheld the federal statute, Section 922(g)(3), that precludes any “unlawful users” of controlled substances from owning or purchasing firearms.
While the Justice Department has repeatedly argued that people who use cannabis, in compliance with state law, are uniquely dangerous—and that there are historical analogues in U.S. gun laws that justify the ban—the appeals court disagreed, vacated the prior ruling and remanded the case back to a lower court.
The federal government’s “allegations in the operative complaint do not lead to the inference that the plaintiffs are comparatively similar to either felons or dangerous individuals.”
The plaintiffs in the years-long case are Vera Cooper and Nicole Hansell, who are registered medical cannabis patients denied gun purchases over their admission to participating in the program, and Neill Franklin, a former police officer who wants to access medical marijuana without jeopardizing his right to own a firearm.
Former Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried (D) initially led the suit against the federal government, but she was removed from the case after leaving her state office. The Republican commissioner who replaced her declined to become involved in the legal proceedings.
One of the most controversial aspects of the many active firearms and marijuana cases deals with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2022 where justices generally created a higher standard for policies that seek to impose restrictions on gun rights. The ruling states that any such restrictions must be consistent with the historical context of the Second Amendment’s original 1791 ratification.
To that end, the Justice Department has argued that the two medical cannabis patients in the Florida case should be deprived of their gun rights due to their alleged felonious activity and dangerousness.
After reviewing the district court ruling on appeal, the Eleventh Circuit said “nothing in the [complaint] indicates that [plaintiffs] have committed any felony or been convicted of any crime (felony or misdemeanor), let alone that their medical marijuana use makes them dangerous.”
“Thus, the government failed to meet its burden—at the motion to dismiss stage—to establish that disarming medical marijuana users is consistent with this Nation’s history and tradition of firearm regulation,” the opinion says.
Keep reading
You must be logged in to post a comment.