Comment on FR Doc # 2026-01141

I support ATF’s interim final rule revising the definition of “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” to better align with statutory text, judicial decisions, and longstanding constitutional principles. For many years, individuals could effectively lose their Second Amendment rights based on a single admission of marijuana use, a single positive drug test, or another isolated incident, even where there was no evidence of ongoing impairment, addiction, habitual use, or dangerous behavior. ATF itself now recognizes that these single-incident inferences often conflicted with federal court decisions interpreting 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(3). I am a disabled veteran and strongly support protecting the constitutional rights of lawful firearm owners, including medical cannabis patients operating in compliance with state medical programs. Individuals should not automatically lose constitutional protections based on isolated incidents, outdated assumptions, or broad administrative inferences that do not demonstrate dangerousness or ongoing unlawful conduct. ATF correctly acknowledges in this rule that courts have repeatedly required evidence of regular, ongoing, and contemporaneous unlawful drug use before a person may properly be classified as a prohibited person under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(3). The prior reliance on isolated or sporadic incidents created confusion, inconsistent enforcement, and serious constitutional concerns. I especially support the revised language clarifying that isolated or sporadic conduct does not automatically make a person an unlawful user of a controlled substance. Constitutional rights should not disappear because of a single incident, an isolated admission, or lawful medical treatment that poses no demonstrated threat to public safety. This issue is particularly important as cannabis laws continue to evolve nationwide. Cannabis has increasingly been recognized for legitimate medical use, and federal policy itself has shifted significantly, including ongoing efforts to move cannabis to Schedule III. Continuing to treat otherwise law-abiding medical cannabis patients as prohibited persons based on outdated assumptions undermines public confidence in the fairness and consistency of federal firearms laws. The government should focus enforcement on individuals who are demonstrably dangerous or actively impaired, not disabled veterans, medical patients, or otherwise law-abiding Americans. I support ATF’s efforts to align the regulation with judicial precedent, reduce erroneous denials, and protect constitutional rights while still preserving prohibitions for genuinely dangerous or habitual unlawful drug users. I encourage ATF to finalize this rule.