June 18, 2026 — In United States v. Hemani, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that the federal government’s prosecution of Ali Hemani under a provision of the Gun Control Act violated the Second Amendment. That provision, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), automatically bars anyone who is an “unlawful user” of a controlled substance from possessing a firearm. Hemani, a Texas resident who told federal agents he used marijuana a few times a week, was prosecuted on that basis alone and faced up to 15 years in prison and a lifetime firearms ban, though the government never alleged he was dangerous or had misused the gun.
The justices were unanimous in the result. Writing for the Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch held that the government could not disarm and prosecute Hemani based solely on his drug use, and rejected its argument that regular drug users are comparable to the “habitual drunkards” targeted by early American laws. The Court stressed that its decision is narrow: it does not reach laws aimed at people who are addicted or presently intoxicated, or prosecutions backed by individualized evidence that a person poses a danger.
The Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) issued the following statement in response to the ruling:
For more than half a century, federal law has treated an individual’s mere use of a controlled substance as proof that the person is dangerous. Ali Hemani was never accused of harming anyone, but he was prosecuted — and faced up to 15 years in prison and a lifetime ban on owning a firearm — because he told federal agents he used cannabis a few times a week. Today, the Court recognized the reality that personal drug use, by itself, is insufficient to restrict someone’s constitutionally guaranteed rights.
That distinction sits at the foundation of any honest drug policy. The Controlled Substances Act sorts drugs into schedules for reasons that often have nothing to do with whether they make anyone violent, yet the government asked the Court to treat everyone on the wrong side of those schedules as categorically dangerous. The Court wisely declined.
This ruling is narrow, and it does not undo the harms of prohibition. People are still criminalized and stripped of their rights for using substances in ways that harm no one, and those consequences still fall hardest on the communities the drug war targeted from the beginning. But the principle the Court affirmed today — that the government must specifically show how a person’s actions justify restrictions of their rights, rather than inherently associating personal drug use with irresponsible behavior —is another step toward a more sensible federal drug policy.
— Ismail L. Ali, J.D., MAPS Co-Executive Director
ABOUT MAPS
Founded in 1986, MAPS is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit research and educational organization that develops medical, legal, and cultural contexts for people to benefit from the careful use of psychedelics and marijuana. MAPS previously sponsored the most advanced psychedelic-assisted therapy research in the world and continues to support psychedelic and marijuana research with a focus on the people and places most impacted by trauma. MAPS incubated Resilient Pharmaceuticals (formerly Lykos Therapeutics), a drug-development public benefit company, and The Zendo Project, a leader in psychedelic harm reduction. Since MAPS was founded, philanthropic donors and grantors have given more than $150 million to advance psychedelic research, change drug policy, and shape culture.
