“The interest of NORML here is not in protecting a particular company’s profits. It is in preserving the civil accountability on which consumers in state-regulated cannabis markets depend.”
Category: Litigation
Justices determined, “Marijuana user or not, [the defendant] is a member of our political community and thus has a presumptive right to bear arms. By infringing on that right, 922(g)(3) contradicts the Second Amendment’s plain text.”
“In short, our history and tradition may support some limits on an intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon, but it does not justify disarming a sober citizen based exclusively on his past drug usage.”
The U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has accepted NORML’s ‘friend of the court’ amicus brief in a case that seeks to protect the Second Amendment rights of state-authorized medical cannabis patients.
“For millions of patients, cannabis is a legitimate therapeutic option. More and more, lawmakers, regulators, and the courts are recognizing this fact and evolving their opinions and policies accordingly.”
“[T]he mere use of marijuana carries none of the characteristics that the Nation’s history and tradition of firearms regulation supports,” the Court determined. “The mere use of marijuana does not indicate that someone is in fact dangerous” or has a “proclivity for violence.”
“Because the use of marijuana under AMMA ‘must be considered the equivalent of the use of any other medication under the direction of a physician,’ the exposure of [the plaintiff’s] infant to marijuana resulted from medical treatment and did not constitute neglect under A.R.S. § 8–201(25)(c).”
“Legalization opponents cannot succeed in the court of public opinion or at the ballot box,” NORML’s Deputy Director Paul Armentano said. “Thus, they are now petitioning the courts to overturn the will of the people. Whether or not one supports marijuana legalization, Americans should be deeply concerned by this trend and by the outcome of this case.”