The question
Whether prosecuting a person for possessing a gun while an unlawful drug user, under a federal statute, violates the Second Amendment as applied to him.
United States v. Hemani
What the Court decided
The Court held that prosecuting Mr. Hemani under the federal law barring gun possession by an unlawful drug user violated the Second Amendment as applied to him. Every justice agreed with the outcome. The Court found the government could not point to a historical tradition that supported disarming this defendant on this record.
How the justices split
UnanimousThe Court's opinion
Gorsuch, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Jackson
Disarming a person merely because he is an unlawful drug user does not fit the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation on this record, so the prosecution cannot stand as applied to Hemani. The government must ground a modern disarmament in a comparable historical principle, and it did not do so here.
Concurring
Thomas, writing alone
Thomas joined the Court and wrote separately to emphasize the demands of the historical test.
Concurring
Jackson, joined by Sotomayor
Jackson joined the Court and wrote separately about how narrowly the ruling should be read.
Concurring in the judgment
Alito, joined by Kagan
Alito agreed with the outcome but not all of the reasoning, concurring only in the judgment.
How we know · 3 sourced claims
The Court held that prosecuting Hemani under the unlawful-user provision is inconsistent with the Second Amendment.
Source: syllabus, Held, at 24-1234
The Court found no historical tradition supporting his disarmament on this record.
Source: opinion of the Court (Gorsuch, J.)
Gorsuch, J., wrote for the Court, joined by six Justices; Alito, J., concurred in the judgment, joined by Kagan, J.
Source: syllabus, lineup