Felon-in-Possession Laws After Bruen and the War on Drugs

Authors

Laura Ginsberg Abelson, Southern Methodist University, Dedman School of LawFollow

ORCID (Links to author’s additional scholarship at ORCID.org)

https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6808-6978

Abstract

The legal landscape surrounding firearm possession is evolving rapidly. In 2022, the Supreme Court accelerated its expansion of the individual right to bear arms under the Second Amendment in New York Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen. Since Bruen, courts around the country have struck down nearly all types of firearm regulations, with a notable exception: felon-in-possession laws. This Article examines the implications of a legal landscape where those who have prior felony convictions, and especially prior drug convictions, are punished harshly for the same behavior—possession of a firearm—that is constitutionally protected for nearly everyone else. I argue that as the Second Amendment expands to protect more and more firearm possession, a dichotomy has arisen in which those who live in the communities most heavily targeted by the War on Drugs of the 1980s and 1990s are increasingly becoming virtually the only Americans for whom firearm possession is illegal. I examine the history and development of felon-in-possession statutes to show that they were not enacted with a clear purpose and are not narrowly tailored to criminalize the most dangerous behavior. Further, I show how existing federal enforcement priorities and the structure of the United States Sentencing Guidelines compound the harms of the War on Drugs by punishing individuals with prior drug offenses most harshly, even when there is limited evidence to suggest that they pose the greatest danger from firearm possession. The Supreme Court recently confirmed that the Second Amendment permits individuals who pose a danger to the community to be disarmed in United States v. Rahimi. The question of how to determine who poses such a danger will be the next threshold of Second Amendment jurisprudence. I argue that as our understanding of the Second Amendment evolves, prosecutors and legislators must be cognizant of the lasting effects of the War on Drugs and question the assumption that any prior felony conviction is an accurate proxy for dangerousness.

Publication Title

UC Irvine Law Review

Document Type

Article

Keywords

Criminal law, Criminal justice reform, Race and the law, Second Amendment, Firearms, Felon-in-possession

Recommended Citation

L. G. Abelson, Reevaluating Felon-in-Possession Laws After Bruen and the War on Drugs, 15 U.C. Irvine L. Rev. 871 (2025)