Saf sues u.s. over medical marijuana 2a ban

SAF SUES U.S. AG, HEADS OF ATF, FBI OVER MEDICAL MARIJUANA 2A BAN

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation and a District Attorney in Pennsylvania have filed a [federal lawsuit against Attorney General Merrick Garland, the heads of the FBI and ATF, and the U.S. Government, challenging the federal prohibition on gun ownership by medical marijuana users.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. In addition to Garland, the lawsuit names FBI Director Christopher Wray and ATF Director Steven Dettelbach as defendants. SAF is joined by Warren County, Pa., District Attorney Robert Greene, who has served in that office since 2013 and currently possesses a medical marijuana ID card under Pennsylvania law. They are represented by attorneys Adam Kraut, who serves as SAF’s executive director, and Joshua Prince of Bechtelsville, Pa.

The lawsuit challenges restrictions contained in 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(3), (d)(3), which prohibit firearms purchases and possession by persons who use marijuana or other controlled substances.

“Medicinal marijuana has been adopted by 38 states despite federal inaction on the issue,” said Kraut, who is also a practicing attorney in Pennsylvania. “With the increasing acceptance of medical cannabis, millions of Americans are forced to choose between the exercise of their Second Amendment rights or treating their symptoms with a substance that disenfranchises them from their constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms. Such a choice is incompatible with the constitution and finds no basis in this country’s history and tradition. We look forward to vindicating the rights of medical marijuana users.”

“The use of medical marijuana should not translate to an automatic surrender of one’s Second Amendment rights,” added SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The current restrictions unquestionably and arbitrarily infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, and the restriction lacks any direct or analogous historical support, as required by the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen ruling.”

4 Likes

This is what one calls a catch 22. Making this decision is like being stuck between a rock and hard place. I would love to hear the discussion on how they make this decision. I think they are going to get first hand experience from experts (people with medical Marijuana cards).

1 Like

So, rather than insist that Congress do its job and either repeal the statute in question or demand its enforcement, the lawsuit is essentially asking courts – a collection of unelected, largely unaccountable judges in jobs for life – to make the laws around marijuana and guns coherent.

I’d imagine the point is repealing the prohibition of cannabis giving the same rights to cannabis users as alcohol users.

With a majority of states at least allowing medical cannabis use, it is somewhat ridiculous to try and enforce that law.

If they were to jail every (otherwise) legal gun owner just because they smoked a little bud they’d have to turn entire states into concentration camps.

As that California case just proved, if someone is going to have a drug or alcohol induced psychotic break, they don’t need a gun to commit a heinous crime.

3 Likes

If medical marijuana is an issue, what about all the other drugs cautioning about not driving or using machinery while taking this drug? Has anyone lost their 2A rights for for prescription painkillers? Don’t see the difference except for one thing, big pharma isn’t getting rich off medical marijuana. Fortunately don’t need either. Just another case when laws are dictated by large donors.

4 Likes

OMG! You took the exact words right out of my brain.
“OK sir I’m going to prescribe OxyContin for pain control for that sprained ankle, just report to the Police Station with all of your firearms on the way to the pharmacy…”?

4 Likes