| Outcome | Probability | Yes Bid | Yes Ask | 24h Change | Volume | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before 2026 | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
This market asks whether the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold the federal prohibition on firearm possession by users of marijuana. The question matters because a decision could affect the intersection of federal gun law, state marijuana policies, and Second Amendment doctrine nationwide.
Federal law (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3)) bars firearm possession by those who are unlawful users of or addicted to controlled substances; marijuana is a scheduled drug under federal law even as many states have legalized medical or recreational use. The Supreme Court's recent Second Amendment framework emphasizes historical tradition and has produced splits in lower courts about how to evaluate modern regulations, creating the legal context for this case. The outcome will hinge on how the Court applies its Second Amendment precedent to a regulation rooted in federal drug policy and on questions of statutory interpretation and federalism.
Market prices reflect traders' aggregated expectations about how the Court will rule and update as briefs, oral arguments, amicus filings, and public signals emerge. Use price movements as real-time indicators of shifting expectations rather than definitive forecasts, and pay attention to new legal filings and lower-court rulings that can materially change market sentiment.
An 'uphold' outcome means the Supreme Court affirms that the federal prohibition on firearm possession by marijuana users is lawful as applied or facially valid under governing constitutional and statutory tests, leaving the federal statute in force.
The Court will evaluate the issue under its recent Second Amendment framework, which focuses on whether a challenged regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation, alongside statutory interpretation of the federal gun and drug laws and separation-of-powers considerations.
The principal parties are the petitioner and the federal government as respondent; influential actors include the Department of Justice and Solicitor General briefs, major advocacy groups filing amicus briefs on both sides, and lower-court judges whose opinions set up the legal questions.
Key milestones include the Court granting or denying certiorari (if not already granted), merits briefing deadlines, oral argument, and the Court’s opinion release during its term; each stage typically generates new information that can shift expectations.
An upheld federal rule would leave federal firearm disabilities in place regardless of state legalization, meaning individuals who use marijuana could remain prohibited from possessing firearms under federal law even in states where marijuana is legal; enforcement and interaction with state law could vary depending on DOJ policy and prosecutions.