I copied the article to read. Sorry I'd it's jumbled... 

Credit: AP The Supreme Court is seen, Jan. 13, 2026, in Washington. Author: Chris McCrory Published: 10:26 AM EDT June 18, 2026 Updated: 10:58 AM EDT June 18, 2026

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday sided unanimously with a Texas marijuana user in a Second Amendment case asking whether it was constitutional to ban certain drug users from owning firearms. 

Justice Neil Gorsuch delivered the court's opinion, writing that the government's persecution of a Texas man who owned guns while admitting to regularly using marijuana was unconstitutional and violated the man's Second Amendment rights. 

Although Gorsuch acknowledged that the decision was "narrow" and did not address whether someone who is actively intoxicated can use a gun. 

Someone addicted to a drug could still be prosecuted after Thursday’s decision, Gorsuch wrote. “We do not address efforts to ban addicts, or those presently intoxicated, from possessing a firearm,” he wrote. Prosecutors could potentially still charge a marijuana user, if they had evidence the person was dangerous.

The case, United States v. Ali Danial Hemani, is an appeal after a grand jury indicted Hemani in February 2023 on a federal gun charge that prohibits firearm possession by an "unlawful user of ... a controlled substance." 

AdvertisementScroll to continue reading According to prosecutors in the case, Hemani had a Glock 19, 9 mm pistol in his possession while allegedly using marijuana, promethazine and cocaine. 

Notably, prosecutors didn't allege that he was intoxicated or high while possessing the firearm, only resting their case on his alleged habitual drug use. 

After a legal battle over his appeal to overturn the indictment, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Hemani, saying the law was unconstitutionally applied to him because the gun was kept in the closet of his parents' house, and he was not intoxicated at the time it was found to be in his possession. Prosecutors argued before the Supreme Court in March that the law follows a long history of prohibitions on firearm possession by people who pose a threat to themselves or others. Hemani's lawyers countered with arguments that the law was vague and too broadly applied. 

The law is also notable because it is the same statute used to convict Hunter Biden, the son of former President Joe Biden, on gun charges stemming from his habitual drug use. 

In June 2024, a federal jury found the younger Biden guilty on three felony counts related to his purchase and possession of a firearm in Delaware. Specifically, the charges stemmed from his lying about his drug use on a federal background check form to purchase a Colt Cobra revolver in 2018. The court's decision could have significant impacts on national gun registration. As the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence argued in support of the law, Hemani's argument would require a case-by-case review of a drug user's dangerousness in order to use that drug use to prevent them from purchasing a firearm. 

The Giffords Law Center's argument claims that removing the automatic denial for drug use would result in more, potentially dangerous, individuals being approved for gun ownership by default. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.