The Supreme Court Just Handed Gun Owners A 9-0 Win

About this video

Colion breaks down the Supreme Court’s unanimous 9-0 ruling in US v. Rahimi, where the Court found that a federal law barring drug users from gun ownership was unconstitutionally applied to a Texas marijuana user who posed no danger. He explains how the government failed to meet the Bruen standard by comparing casual marijuana use to historical ‘habitual drunkard’ laws, and argues this represents a rare check on the government’s practice of categorically stripping rights without proving individual danger.

Key takeaways

• Colion teaches that the Court ruled narrowly: the law itself wasn’t struck down, but its application to this specific person who showed no danger was unconstitutional
• According to Colion, under the Bruen standard, the government must find historical analogs to justify gun restrictions, and comparing casual marijuana users to 1700s habitual drunkards failed that test
• Colion emphasizes that categorical rights removal (labeling someone a ‘user’ and automatically stripping rights) is the core problem, and this ruling forces the government to prove individual danger rather than rely on categories alone

Episode details: published June 22, 2026 · 8:49 long. Summary written by Self Growth Videos from the episode itself. Colion Noir’s legal commentary reflects his positions and teaching, attributed to him — it is not legal advice. His defensive-incident breakdowns are his analysis of reported incidents, attributed to him.

← Previous: Exclusive: ATF Director Explains Suppressor Wait Times -14 Months to 48 Hours · Next: Canada’s Gun Control Fantasy Just Met Reality →

All Colion Noir videos · Colion Noir profile · Colion Noir on YouTube