This episode breaks down excerpts from a Supreme Court oral argument about whether federal law 18 USC 922(g)(3) can categorically bar “unlawful” marijuana users from Second Amendment rights under the Bruin historical-tradition test and in light of Rahimi’s dangerousness focus. It highlights Justice Gorsuch questioning whether “habitual user” is defined too loosely compared to historical “habitual drunkard” laws, and similar concerns from Justices Sotomayor and Barrett about whether scheduling decisions reflect individualized dangerousness.

Justice Thomas presses distinctions between marijuana and other drugs (including anabolic steroids) and notes the DEA’s ongoing rescheduling process, while Justice Alito emphasizes the founders’ lack of experience with modern drugs. Justice Kagan poses an ayahuasca hypothetical, and the host predicts a likely 6–3 or 7–2 outcome against the government’s position, with a decision expected by late June.

Shout out to this channel, here’s the whole thing: https://youtu.be/iMow-Yt1sJo?si=JU1zmjqVxBAgOk_l

00:00 Supreme Court Preview
00:34 Gorsuch Questions Habitual Use
02:14 Founding Era Context
03:57 Sotomayor Ambien Analogy
05:08 Thomas on Illegality
07:24 Alito History Problem
09:01 Kavanaugh Mens Rea
12:13 Gorsuch Rescheduling Pushback
16:19 Barrett Demands Dangerousness
23:15 Jackson on Bruin Limits
25:25 Kagan Ayahuasca Hypothetical
29:02 Predicted Vote Count
30:22 Wrap Up and Sponsor