Second Amendment

A SCOTUS Petition Argues That Pot Growers, Like Pot Smokers, Cannot Be Categorically Disarmed

The case involves a federal law that criminalizes gun possession by people convicted of nonviolent felonies.

Jacob Sullum | 10.5.2026 4:06 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google

Media Contact & Reprint Requests

(Asphoto777/Dreamstime)

After Joseph Johnson was convicted of unauthorized marijuana cultivation in Colorado 11 years ago, his sentence was limited to probation. But because Johnson's crime could have been punished by more than a year of incarceration, his conviction triggered a federal law that makes it a felony for anyone with such a record to possess firearms or ammunition. In 2025, after a traffic stop and a welfare check in Oklahoma revealed that Johnson owned a gun, he pleaded guilty to two counts of violating 18 USC 922(g)(1) and was sentenced to a year in federal prison.

Last April, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit upheld Johnson's conviction, rejecting his argument that it violated the Second Amendment. Now Johnson is asking the Supreme Court to overrule the 10th Circuit by allowing as-applied challenges to Section 922(g)(1). His petition, which has been listed for consideration at this Friday's Supreme Court conference, recently attracted support from the Cato Institute and three leading gun rights groups, which argue that the Second Amendment does not allow the government to categorically disarm nonviolent felons like Johnson.

The Supreme Court regularly receives a large number of petitions in this category and regularly declines to accept them. But its decision last June in United States v. Hemani suggests it may be more receptive this term. Hemani involved 18 USC 922(g)(3), which makes it a felony for an "unlawful user" of "any controlled substance" to receive or possess a firearm. The justices unanimously rejected the prosecution of a Texas cannabis consumer under Section 922(g)(3), saying the government may not disarm people or charge them with illegal gun possession simply because they use marijuana.

In the wake of Hemani, lower courts are addressing the question of what additional evidence is necessary to sustain a conviction under Section 922(g)(3). But in the absence of Supreme Court guidance regarding Section 922(g)(1), appeals courts have split on whether the Second Amendment poses any barrier to prosecutions under that........

© Reason.com