Patriots buckle up. The United States Supreme Court has accepted a second two-way case for this term. But, say with me, there’s always a but. And we need to talk about this one because I think that the Department of Justice made a grave, perhaps intentional mistake in this case, in my opinion, could be, has the potential to be very bad for the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court has granted certiorari in a major Second Amendment case. The case is United States versus Himani. And this one could decide once and for all whether Americans who use marijuana or other controlled substances lose their right to keep and bear arms.

This is Section 922 G3, and you’ve heard it on this channel for years because it’s been being attacked for years as unconstitutional. It’s the same law used for decades to criminalize gun ownership by anyone that the government deems an unlawful user of a controlled substance. And now, after Bruin, Rahimi, and Range, the Supreme Court is stepping back into the Second Amendment fight. Hey everybody, I’m Jared. This is Guns and Gadgets, your premier source for Second Amendment news that you won’t hear anywhere else. This case could affect millions of gun owners across the country, especially those living in states where marijuana is legal under state law, but still banned federally.

And for the first time, the High Court will decide directly whether the government can strip you of your Second Amendment rights just for using a substance that’s legal in half the nation. Now, let’s break down exactly what this case is, why the government is fighting hard to keep the ban, and how this decision could reshape the Second Amendment law across America. The case centers on a man named Ali Daniel Himani, a dual US Pakistani citizen who is charged under 18 USC 922 G3 for possessing a firearm while being an unlawful user of marijuana and other drugs.

He wasn’t accused of using drugs while holding the gun. He wasn’t high during a crime. He was simply a habitual marijuana user, and that was enough for federal prosecutors to say, you lose your Second Amendment rights, bud. Now, remember, I said there was a but. Let’s pause right here for a minute and learn more about our subject, our plaintiff, Ali Daniel Himani. Like I said, he’s a dual citizen of the United States and Pakistan, and his actions have drawn the attention of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Let’s talk about a couple instances here. In 2019, a search of his phone at a border crossing revealed communications suggesting that he was poised to commit fraud at the direction of suspected affiliates of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, a designated foreign terrorist organization.

In 2020, Himani and his parents traveled to Iran to participate in a celebration of the life of Qassem Soleimani, an Iranian general and a terrorist who had been killed by an American drone strike the month before. Himani’s mother was captured on video telling an Iranian news agency that she prayed her two sons, which includes our respondent, would become martyrs like Soleimani. Now, the respondent here, Himani, also maintains weekly contact with his brother, who attends an Iranian university that the United States government has designated as having ties to terrorism. And Himani himself has told law enforcement officials that if he knew about an imminent terrorist attack by a Shia brother that would kill innocent people, he would not report it to the authorities.

He’s also a drug dealer, according to the filing, who uses illegal drugs. And text messages recovered from his phone showed that he used and sold illegal drugs and some that he said he found addictive that he uses. He also used cocaine and marijuana. Now, the FBI obtained a search warrant of his family home and they found a Glock nine millimeter pistol. I guess we’re calling those pre-V versions. They also found 60 grams of marijuana and 4.7 grams of cocaine. Himani told FBI that he used marijuana about every other day. And he also mentioned that the cocaine, which had been found in his mother’s room, in fact, belonged to him.

He is kind of like our boy, Hunter Biden. Now, a grand jury charged the respondent with violating 18 USC 922 G3, which makes it unlawful for any person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance. To possess a firearm or affecting commerce. Now, this prosecution rests on his habitual use of marijuana, but it would seem as though this is another terrible plaintiff here and one that allegedly is a terrorist or at least has ties to terrorism. Now, the most self-proclaimed, most pro-2A Department of Justice ever handpicked a literal terrorist to be the defendant in the next Second Amendment Supreme Court case.

And as Attorney General Pam Bondi knows very well, bad facts make bad law, just like US versus Rahimi, which was handpicked by Biden’s Department of Justice. Now, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the same circuit that gave us Rahimi and Daniels, struck down this law in question as unconstitutional, saying that the government can’t ban people from owning firearms just because they use drugs unless they’re actually under the influence or impaired while armed. And that ruling created a three-way circuit split. The Seventh Circuit upheld the law. The Eighth Circuit struck it down differently. And the Fifth Circuit said it is unconstitutional in almost every case.

And that’s what sent this issue straight to the Supreme Court. The Justice Department, led by Solicitor General John Sauer here, filed this petition for certiorari, asking the Supreme Court to reverse the Fifth Circuit and reinstate the ban. Again, the self-proclaimed, most-2A-friendly Department of Justice in the history of this nation is defending this infringement. They’re arguing that Section 922 G3 is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Their logic? They say drug users today are no different than habitual drunkards in the founding era who were often disarmed or jailed under local laws. The DOJ claims that Congress has always had the power to temporarily disarm people who pose a risk of misusing firearms like felons, the mentally ill, or those who are addicted to drugs.

They also argue that this restriction is not permanent, because anyone can restore their gun rights by simply quitting drugs. I don’t think they’ve actually followed through with that claim. So there’s that. And that’s their biggest talking point here, that this is a temporary restriction. But here’s the kicker. Even the Solicitor General here admits that millions of law-abiding Americans could fall under this rule, since marijuana remains illegal federally. No matter what the state says. So while it’s framed as a public safety measure, it effectively criminalizes an entire group of citizens, not because they’re violent, but because they’re not in lockstep with federal drug law.

And after the Supreme Court’s Bruin decision in 2022, which told lower courts that they must uphold gun laws only if they align with historical tradition, Section 922 G3 started getting hammered in courtrooms. And after case after case challenged this, this brings us here. The United States versus Daniels in the Fifth Circuit said, you can’t just ban gun ownership for marijuana users who aren’t high. The Supreme Court later vacated that decision after Rahimi, but it didn’t reject to the reasoning. And then came the United States versus Connolly in 2024, where the Fifth Circuit doubled down, saying there’s no historical justification for disarming a sober person who occasionally uses marijuana.

So the DOJ used Hemanis case as their vehicle, a clean test, they say, a clean test case to get this issue back before the Supreme Court. And now they’ve got it. The Department of Justice’s brief is revealing. It lays out their full constitutional argument, and it’s clear that they’re trying to narrow the reach of Bruin. They argue that founding era laws disarm drunkards and vagrants, so Congress can disarm drug users today. The ban fits within a long standing tradition of limiting gun rights for those dangerous to the public, they say. And that because the ban is temporary, it doesn’t really violate the Second Amendment.

This is the self-proclaimed, most pro to a friendly DOJ in the history of the nation. And they also admit that the law is sweeping. It applies even to drug use if it happened weeks before the gun possession. I’m sure Pam Bondi and Harmeet Dillon are going to love this video. Now, the Fifth Circuit called that unconstitutional. The DOJ wants to bring that back. They even cited a danger to police officers arguing that drug users pose a grave risk of armed hostile encounters with law enforcement while impaired. And that’s their way of saying if you use marijuana, even if it was 29 days ago, you are too dangerous to own a gun.

Now, think about that for a second. Half of the states in this country, whether you agree with it or not, have legalized marijuana. Tens of millions of Americans have tried it or used it occasionally, whether it’s for recreational or medicinal purposes. And the Department of Justice just told the U.S. Supreme Court that every single one of them could be and should be legally disarmed. This case really isn’t about drugs. It’s about the power of the federal government to label whole classes of people as dangerous and strip them of their constitutional rights without due process. Today, it’s marijuana users.

Tomorrow, it could be veterans on anxiety medication or anyone taking a prescription that the government later decides to classify as a controlled substance. The Fifth Circuit said that logic doesn’t hold up under Bruin. The Second Amendment protects the people, not the government’s favorites. And the Founding Fathers would have never stood for a rule that allows Congress to say you had a joint last month so you lose your rights. The Supreme Court granted cert, which means they’ll hear arguments later this term, probably early in 2026. And expect major amicus briefs from groups like GOA and SAF and FPC here all pushing to strike this law down.

But on the other side of the coin, the Department of Justice will have the support of anti-gun states, public health groups and the usual crowd of gun control morons and organizations trying to preserve every tool they have to disarm people. And while it’s too early to predict the outcome now, this court has already shown in Bruin and Rahimi that it’s willing to hold the line on the Second Amendment, but they do not tend to rule in favor of criminal plaintiffs, which is what we have here with Himani. So here’s the bottom line. If the Supreme Court sides with Himani, it could wipe out the drug user prohibition nationwide, restoring rights to countless law-abiding Americans.

If they side with the DOJ, it could cement the idea that your lifestyle choices, not your actions, determine whether you get to keep your rights. Either way, this is one of the biggest Second Amendment cases of the year. And before we wrap up, if you love America and you love your coffee strong, check out Blackout Coffee, made right here in the United States of America by patriots who believe in the same values that we fight for every single day. Every bag is small batch roasted, bold and fresh, never sitting in a warehouse for months like the big brands.

So start your morning with a brew that tastes like freedom. Head on over to blackoutcoffee.com slash G&G, use code G&G10 to save 10% on your order. And make sure you check out our subscriptions because we have a flavor of the month program and a roaster’s choice program. And these products do not make it to the store regularly. They’re only for the subscribers. So check us out. Patriots, this case could reshape how the Second Amendment applies to millions of Americans. I’ll be tracking every filing, every argument and every brief as it hits the document. So if you haven’t yet hit the subscribe button to stay in the know, especially about this case, ring the bell so that you don’t miss anything and stay tuned for the truth about your rights.

YouTube has been playing games with the reach of this channel. So please physically come back to this channel every single day because lately I’ve been putting out two to three videos a day. And if you’re not seeing them, YouTube hates us. So check back often. I’m Jared. This is Guns and Gadgets, the premier source for Second Amendment news. And as always, stay safe, stay vigilant, stay free and carry a gun. Take care, America. [tr:trw].

See more of Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News on their Public Channel and the MPN Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News channel.