Marijuana user cannot be banned from gun ownership, US court rules
2024.08.28 17:52
By Nate Raymond
(Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court on Wednesday ruled that a pot-smoking gun owner in Texas cannot be prosecuted for violating a federal ban on users of illegal drugs owning firearms, saying it is unconstitutional to disarm her based on her past drug habits.
The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the prosecution had violated Paola Connelly’s right to keep and bear arms under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment citing a landmark 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that expanded gun rights.
“Marijuana user or not, Paola is a member of our political community and thus has a presumptive right to bear arms,” U.S. Circuit Judge Kurt Engelhardt, an appointee of Republican former President Donald Trump, wrote for a three-judge panel.
Engelhardt said that while the government may be allowed to bar someone currently under the influence of drugs from having weapons, “there is no historical justification for disarming a sober citizen not presently under an impairing influence.”
The ruling partly upheld a judge’s decision to toss on Second Amendment grounds all of the charges Connelly faced. The panel revived a separate charge that she violated a ban on transferring firearms to someone using illegal drugs.
The U.S. Department of Justice and Connelly’s attorney did not respond to requests for comment.
She was indicted after El Paso police officers responded in December 2021 to a report of shots fired at her home after a conflict arose between her husband and their neighbor.
Upon arrival, officers found Connelly’s husband standing at the neighbor’s door firing a shotgun.
Following his arrest, officers spoke with Connelly, who indicated she sometimes smoked marijuana. A search of the Connellys’ home found drug paraphernalia and several guns, including some she owned.
In upholding the dismissal of the gun possession charge against Connelly, Engelhardt cited a 2022 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority that established a new test for assessing whether modern firearm restrictions comply with the Second Amendment.
The court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen requires gun regulations to be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” Many laws have been declared invalid following that decision.
Engelhardt said until the 19th Century, little regulation of drugs existed. While some laws dating to the country’s founding barred carrying weapons while under the influence of alcohol, “none barred gun possession by regular drinkers,” he wrote.
