I’ll take a win on this, any way I can get it…

“you are trying to say what?”

I’ll let George Thorogood speak for me :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fHxFS9PiYM

you are trying to say what?

i believe he’s considering moving it to schedule 3.
somehow this makes research on its effectiveness easier?

“However, there’s still some confusion about marijuana and gun laws, and the Supreme Court will be hearing a case that deals with some of those. Here are some ways they might view the case. [see rest at link]”

(Clip verbose diarrhea)

See my reply above…

“Trump wants pot moved from Schedule I (1) to Schedule III (3) [not Schedule II (2)] in his executive order, which means its still regulated thus ‘controlled’. ”

Mental Marvel – (sarcasm) The highest restriction, Schedule 1, recognizes ZERO valid medical uses, while its now lower-schedule DOES recognize valid medical uses.

That’s a big-ass fvcking difference, in the eyes of the law, and therefore, the highest court, the SCotUS…

You the MAN! 🙂

How SCOTUS Might View ‘Unlawful’ Drug Use.

“On Thursday, President Donald Trump issued an executive order that rescheduled marijuana from a Schedule 1 drug to a Schedule 3 drug. What that means is that while it’s still a controlled substance, it’s medically legal in all states that haven’t somehow expressly banned it. Because of that, anyone who gets a prescription for the drug isn’t an unlawful user, and thus can’t really be arrested for owning a gun while using it under a doctor’s orders.
…
However, there’s still some confusion about marijuana and gun laws, and the Supreme Court will be hearing a case that deals with some of those. Here are some ways they might view the case. [see rest at link]
…”

ht* tps://bearingarms.com/tomknighton/2025/12/20/how-scotus-might-view-unlawful-drug-use-n1230981

Is this the Hemani case?

If so, I don’t think its going to have any effect because possession is not at question in the case but rather use. Trump wants pot moved from Schedule I (1) to Schedule III (3) [not Schedule II (2)] in his executive order, which means its still regulated thus ‘controlled’.

The 4473 question (and law) reads “an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance” – it doesn’t say anything about ‘possession’ of the drug in relation to gun possession but rather use – so how is this applied here?

(The case is if 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(3), the federal statute that prohibits the possession of firearms by a person who “is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance,” violates the Second Amendment as applied to Hemani.)

But if LKB could offer some insight that would be good.