BELLEVUE, WA — The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed its opening brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, seeking to overturn a federal district court ruling that dismissed its lawsuit challenging the federal prohibition on firearm ownership for medical marijuana users.

The case, Greene v. Bondi, involves Warren County, Pennsylvania District Attorney Robert Greene and disabled U.S. Army veteran James Irey, both of whom are backed by SAF. Greene currently holds a Pennsylvania Medical Marijuana ID card and wishes to own firearms and ammunition, while Irey wants to obtain a card to treat service-related injuries but fears losing his Second Amendment rights in the process.

At issue is the federal law, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), which classifies anyone using marijuana, even for state-authorized medical purposes, as an “unlawful user” of a controlled substance. This prohibits them from possessing or purchasing firearms and ammunition. Violations carry penalties of up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

“Unlike prescription pain pills, marijuana is federally classified as a Schedule I narcotic, even if a state has legalized it for medical purposes,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “That poses a dilemma for anyone who legally uses medical marijuana – either give up your Second Amendment rights or receive relief from your symptoms. This is an absurd choice to force someone to make, especially given that anyone taking prescription pain killers, such as oxycodone, are allowed to purchase firearms.”

In its appellate brief, SAF argues that the prohibition lacks any historical analogue in American firearms regulation and is therefore unconstitutional under the framework established by the U.S. Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) and later affirmed in United States v. Rahimi (2024). The brief also points out that other federal appellate courts, including the Fifth, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits, have recently issued rulings questioning or limiting the government’s ability to enforce § 922(g)(3).

Alan Gottlieb, SAF’s founder and executive vice president, said the case highlights a growing conflict between federal firearms restrictions and evolving state marijuana laws. “If a person chooses to legally use medical marijuana it should not automatically translate to surrendering their Second Amendment rights,” Gottlieb said. “We look forward to fighting this restriction and vindicating the rights of those who wish to use medical marijuana and exercise their constitutional rights.”

As more states legalize cannabis for medical use, the conflict between state laws and federal firearms restrictions continues to widen. The outcome of Greene v. Bondi could set an important precedent for gun owners nationwide who rely on medical marijuana treatment but do not wish to forfeit their constitutional rights.