2026年6月18日 / 美国东部时间上午11:13 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
华盛顿讯—— 美国最高法院周四作出裁决，支持一名挑战联邦禁止特定吸毒者持有枪支法案的德克萨斯州男子。
在对“美国诉赫马尼”案的一致裁决中，大法官们认定，阿里·赫马尼因身为非法吸毒者持有枪支而被起诉的行为与第二修正案相悖。据称，2022年联邦调查局在他位于德克萨斯州的家中查获一把手枪时，赫马尼只是偶尔吸食大麻。
最高法院的此次裁决范围较窄，因为大法官们并未完全推翻此案核心的这项法律。相反，最高法院表示，政府不能自动剥夺每周仅吸食几次大麻的人的持枪权。大法官尼尔·戈萨奇撰写了法院的多数意见。
他在意见中写道，政府“要求我们认定，任何定期吸食大麻的人都属于暴力和危险人群，无需任何进一步的举证。所有这一切仅仅基于其目前的说法，而这一说法与其自身的监管行动相悖。赋予政府这种‘广泛权力，将任何群体认定为危险群体，从而剥夺其成员持枪权’，可能会让政府‘迅速吞噬’第二修正案。”
戈萨奇写道，最高法院的裁决并未涉及禁止吸毒成瘾者或当前处于醉酒状态的人持有枪支的相关规定。他还表示，该裁决不会影响其他联邦枪支限制措施，包括剥夺重罪犯持枪权的规定，以及需要证明被告的吸毒行为使其具有危险性的起诉案件。
此案涉及的法律禁止非法吸毒者持有枪支，违者最高可判处15年监禁。美国司法部估计，每年约有300人因该罪名被起诉。
根据该法律被定罪的最知名人士或许是前总统乔·拜登之子亨特·拜登，不过他已于2024年12月被父亲赦免。
自2022年最高法院作出具有里程碑意义的裁决，承认公民在户外携带枪支的权利后，此案核心的这项法律是最新一项受到最高法院审查的枪支相关法案。在该裁决中，最高法院为法院审理枪支合宪性案件制定了新的审查标准。该框架要求政府证明某项限制措施符合美国历史上的枪支监管传统。
在该裁决之后，最高法院于2024年维持了一项禁止受家庭暴力限制令约束的人员持有枪支的联邦法律。大法官们目前还在审理对夏威夷州一项法律的挑战案，该法律禁止携带隐蔽持枪许可证的人在未经许可的情况下将枪支带入向公众开放的私人场所。
政府对赫马尼的起诉仅聚焦于他吸食大麻的行为，他的律师称这一行为并未使他变得危险。近年来，已有40个州在不同程度上实现了大麻合法化，这为这场法律斗争增添了新的变数。尽管大麻在联邦层面仍属非法，但特朗普总统已于去年12月签署行政命令，将大麻重新归类为更低等级的管制药品。美国司法部于今年4月将部分大麻产品重新归类为更低等级的管制药品。
戈萨奇在多数意见中，以及加入埃琳娜·卡根大法官协同意见的塞缪尔·阿利托大法官均指出，联邦和州层面的大麻政策转变，以及大麻吸食人数的增加，都对司法部在本案中的立场不利。
“无论人们如何看待这些事态发展，联邦政府不仅对此持容忍态度，还起到了推波助澜的作用，”戈萨奇写道。“所有这一切都让政府尴尬地声称，如今数百万定期吸食大麻的美国人绝对且异常危险。”
尽管拜登总统已采取措施强化第二修正案权利，但特朗普政府此前在最高法院面前为禁止吸毒者持有枪支的法案进行了辩护，并敦促法院维持这项限制措施。
在提交给最高法院的文件中，美国司法部称，第二修正案允许国会限制惯常吸毒者持有枪支。支持特朗普政府立场的还有布雷迪预防枪支暴力中心、吉福德斯预防枪支暴力法律中心等枪支暴力预防组织。
但另一方面，美国公民自由联盟作为共同律师参与了对赫马尼的代理。全国步枪协会等枪支权利组织也对他表示支持。
美国公民自由联盟对最高法院驳回对赫马尼起诉的裁决表示欢迎，称这明确表明政府不能将吸食大麻者持有枪支的行为定为犯罪。
“近一半的美国人称自己曾有过大麻吸食史，这项裁决保护了数百万人的权利，并限制了政府通过武断且毫无根据的假设认定某类人群危险，从而对大量民众施加刑事处罚的能力，”美国公民自由联盟法律主任塞西莉亚·王在一份声明中说道。“法院已明确传递出一个强烈信号：政府不能仅凭定性且毫无依据的假设，就将大量民众的行为定为犯罪。”
Supreme Court sides with Texas man who challenged law barring drug users from having guns
June 18, 2026 / 11:13 AM EDT / CBS News
Washington — The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favor of a Texas man who challenged a federal law that bars certain drug users from having firearms.
In a unanimous decision in the case U.S. v. Hemani, the justices found that Ali Hemani’s prosecution for having a firearm while he was an unlawful drug user is inconsistent the Second Amendment. Hemani allegedly was only an occasional user of marijuana when the FBI found a handgun at his Texas home in 2022.
The ruling from the Supreme Court is narrow, since the justices did not strike down the law at the center of the case in its entirety. Instead, the high court said the government cannot automatically disarm a person who uses marijuana a few times a week. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the majority opinion for the court.
The government, he wrote, “asks us to conclude that anyone who regularly uses marijuana is categorically violent and dangerous without any further showing. All based on little more than its current say-so, one at odds with its own regulatory actions. And affording the government that kind of ‘broad power to designate any group as dangerous and thereby disqualify its members from having a gun’ would risk allowing it to ‘quickly swallow’ the Second Amendment.”
The Supreme Court’s decision does not address efforts to ban drug addicts or those presently intoxicated from having firearms, Gorsuch wrote. He also said it does not impact other federal firearms restrictions, including those that disarm convicted felons, or prosecutions that involve proof that a defendant’s drug use renders him dangerous.
The law at issue in the case forbids an unlawful drug user from possessing firearms, and violators face up to 15 years in prison. The Justice Department estimates roughly 300 people are charged with the offense each year.
Perhaps the most high-profile person convicted under the law was Hunter Biden, former President Joe Biden’s son, though he was pardoned by his father in December 2024.
The law at the center of the case was the latest to face Supreme Court scrutiny in the wake of its landmark 2022 decision that recognized the right to carry a firearm outside the home. In that decision, the high court laid out a new test for courts to apply when considering the constitution of a gun law. The framework requires the government to show that a restriction is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation.
In the wake of that ruling, the Supreme Court upheld in 2024 a federal law barring people subject to domestic violence restraining orders from having guns. The justices are also considering a challenge to a Hawaii law that prohibits people with concealed carry permits from bringing their guns onto private property open to the public without permission.
The government’s case against Hemani focused solely on his marijuana use, which his lawyers said did not make him dangerous. Forty states have legalized marijuana use to some degree in recent years, adding a wrinkle to the legal battle. While it remains illegal at the federal level, President Trump signed an executive order in December to reschedule marijuana to a lower drug classification. The Justice Department in April rescheduled certain marijuana products to a lower drug classification.
Gorsuch, in the majority opinion, and Justice Samuel Alito, in a concurring opinion joined by Justice Elena Kagan, both noted the shifts in marijuana policy at the federal and state levels, as well as the rise in marijuana consumption, and said those trends worked against the Justice Department in the case.
“Whatever one thinks of these developments, the federal government has not just tolerated them; it helped fuel them,” Gorsuch wrote. “All of which leaves it awkwardly positioned to suggest that the millions of Americans who now regularly use marijuana are categorically and unusually dangerous. “
While the president has taken steps to bolster Second Amendment rights, the Trump administration also defended the ban on possession by drug users before the Supreme Court and urged it to uphold the restriction.
In filings with the high court, the Justice Department said the Second Amendment allows Congress to restrict gun possession by habitual drug users. Backing the Trump administration were gun violence prevention groups like the Brady Center for Prevent Gun Violence and Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.
But on the other side, the American Civil Liberties Union signed on as co-counsel to represent Hemani. Also backing him were gun rights groups like the National Rifle Association.
The ACLU cheered the Supreme Court’s decision rejecting Hemani’s prosecution, saying it makes it clear that the government cannot make it a crime for people who use marijuana to own a gun.
“With nearly half of Americans reporting marijuana use at some point in their lives, this ruling protects the rights of millions and curbs the government’s ability to impose arbitrary and discriminatory penalties,” Cecillia Wang, the ACLU’s legal director, said in a statement. “The court has sent a strong message that the government cannot criminalize the conduct of large numbers of people by making categorical and unfounded assumptions about whether they are dangerous.”