The U.S. Supreme Court today declined to hear a challenge to a federal law permanently prohibiting people convicted of felonies from possessing firearms, leaving in place a ruling involving a man whose only prior felony was a nonviolent marijuana cultivation conviction.
In an order issued October 13, the justices denied a petition filed by Joseph Frederick Johnson, who argued that permanently stripping someone of their Second Amendment rights because of a nonviolent marijuana offense violates the U.S. Constitution.
Johnson was convicted in Colorado in 2015 of cultivating marijuana plants. The offense resulted in probation rather than imprisonment, and his probation ended early. According to his attorneys, he has never been convicted of a violent offense.
Years later, police discovered Johnson possessing firearms and ammunition during two separate encounters involving a traffic stop and a welfare check. Federal prosecutors subsequently charged him with two counts of possessing firearms and ammunition as a convicted felon, relying exclusively on his 2015 marijuana conviction.
Johnson pleaded guilty while preserving his right to challenge the constitutionality of the charges. In October 2025, he was sentenced to 366 days in federal prison.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld his convictions in April, concluding that existing circuit precedent prohibited individualized Second Amendment challenges to the federal prohibition, even when the underlying felony involved no violence.
In his Supreme Court petition, Johnson argued that federal appeals courts are divided over whether individuals convicted of nonviolent felonies can challenge firearm restrictions based on their particular circumstances.
His attorneys identified a split among nine federal appeals courts, with six categorically rejecting such challenges and three allowing at least some individuals to pursue them.
The petition also cited the Supreme Court’s June 2026 decision in United States v. Hemani, in which the justices ruled that a person’s marijuana use alone did not justify prosecuting him under a separate federal firearm restriction without sufficient evidence of dangerousness.
Johnson’s attorneys argued that similar constitutional protections should apply to people whose only felony conviction involved nonviolent marijuana activity.
The case attracted support from several organizations, including the Cato Institute, National Rifle Association, Firearms Policy Coalition and Second Amendment Foundation. The organizations submitted briefs urging the Supreme Court to hear the case, challenging the historical and constitutional justification for permanently disarming people convicted of nonviolent offenses.
Federal law under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) generally prohibits anyone convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison from possessing firearms or ammunition, regardless of whether the conviction involved violence.
The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear Johnson’s case does not establish a new nationwide precedent or resolve the disagreement among federal appeals courts. It leaves the Tenth Circuit’s ruling intact, along with Johnson’s firearm convictions and 366-day prison sentence.
The justices provided no explanation for denying the petition. The Justice Department had waived its right to respond, and the case was considered during the Court’s October 9 conference before today’s denial.
