Court rules medical marijuana users retain Second Amendment rights

In a significant ruling, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision on medical marijuana patients' right to own firearms, which took place around August 2025. The court reviewed a case where two Florida residents, Vera Cooper and Nicole Hansell, who use medical marijuana, were denied the ability to purchase guns after disclosing their use. This ruling challenges federal provisions that categorize 'unlawful drug users,' including medical marijuana patients, as inherently dangerous individuals akin to felons, thus disqualifying them from gun ownership. Historically, provisions disarming individuals have been applied to those with documented criminal behavior, like felons or those proven to be mentally unstable. Contrary to federal claims that medical marijuana patients pose a similar risk to intoxicated individuals, the court found that the allegations presented did not support that these individuals were dangerous. In their ruling, the judges pointed out that both Cooper and Hansell use marijuana rationally for health benefits and that their mental state markedly differs from that of those classified as addicts or alcoholics. The lawsuit essentially argued that their rights under the Second Amendment should not be stripped away without substantive evidence linking medical marijuana use to violence or danger. The Eleventh Circuit's decision reflects a trend among federal courts NATIONWIDE, increasingly questioning the justification for banning medical marijuana users from firearm ownership. Similar cases have arisen in the past, including a notable instance last year where a Texas resident was ruled protected under the Second Amendment despite her marijuana use. This case aligns with a broader dialogue in American courts evaluating the rights of medical marijuana users against outdated federal regulations pertaining to gun ownership. Although the law prohibiting marijuana users from firearm ownership still technically stands, the Eleventh Circuit's ruling allows Cooper and Hansell to further pursue their claims. Importantly, the court stated that the federal government has not adequately justified the ongoing disarmament of medical marijuana patients as consistent with historical traditions. This decision reinforces the idea that past drug use does not necessarily equate to present danger and challenges the perception of what constitutes a lawful gun owner in relation to medical substance use.