The Supreme Court unanimously limited how the federal government can apply a 1968 law that bars firearm possession by people who are unlawful users of or addicted to controlled substances. The case involved a Texas man who used marijuana and owned a firearm. The Court said the government had not shown that prosecuting him fit the Second Amendment because it did not allege he was an addict or dangerous because of his use. The ruling leaves a practical policy problem. Marijuana remains regulated under federal drug law, but many states allow medical or adult use. Supporters of strict gun restrictions say drug use can raise safety risks. Critics say lawful or non-dangerous marijuana users should not lose a constitutional right based on broad assumptions. The debate is whether the law should focus on addiction, intoxication while armed, violent conduct, state medical authorization, or a broader federal prohibition. The law should focus on real danger, not assumptions. A person who is armed while impaired is different from someone who used marijuana days ago and has no record of violence.