A Court of Drugs and Guns

What It Covers

Strict Scrutiny hosts Melissa Murray, Kate Shaw, and Leah Littman cover the Supreme Court oral argument in United States v. Hamani — a Second Amendment challenge to federal laws barring drug users from possessing firearms — plus two shadow docket orders on redistricting and transgender rights, and an interview with California Attorney General Rob Bonta on state-level resistance to the Trump administration.

Key Questions Answered

• •Bruen Test Instability: The Supreme Court's originalist framework for Second Amendment cases operates on two incompatible standards — the Bruen "historical twin" requirement and the looser Rahimi "vibe check" approach. Advocates cannot predict which standard applies in any given case, making constitutional gun regulation effectively unpredictable. Hamani exposed this contradiction directly, with justices unable to agree on which version of their own test governed the challenge to the drug-user firearm prohibition.
• •Hamani Outcome Prediction: The court appears likely to invalidate the federal statute prohibiting unlawful drug users from possessing firearms, but potentially on due process vagueness grounds rather than Second Amendment grounds. The statute fails to provide clear notice of who qualifies as an "unlawful user." This procedural off-ramp would let the court avoid a broad Second Amendment ruling while still striking the law, leaving a narrower addict-possession statute intact as a fallback.
• •Shadow Docket Jurisdiction Overreach: In the New York redistricting case, the Supreme Court issued a stay blocking a state court ruling that would have redrawn a Staten Island congressional district to remedy minority vote dilution — despite lacking jurisdiction, because New York's highest court had never been asked to rule. Acting without authority, the court effectively preserved a Republican-held seat, with Justice Sotomayor summarizing the pattern as "rules for thee, but not for me."
• •Substantive Due Process Selective Application: In Mirabelli v. Bonta, the court's Republican majority used the shadow docket to declare that parental rights to be notified if a child identifies as transgender at school are constitutionally protected — while refusing in last term's Scrimetti decision to even consider whether parents have a constitutional right to obtain gender-affirming care for their children. The court issued this major ruling without full merits briefing, bypassing multiple pending circuit court cases on the same question.
• •State AG Coalition Strategy: California AG Rob Bonta describes a coordinated network of 24 Democratic state attorneys general who began preparing legal challenges before the 2024 election by reading Project 2025 and cataloging anticipated executive actions. The coalition pre-drafts briefs so filings require only final edits before submission. This preparation enabled California to file over 60 lawsuits in under 60 weeks, winning approximately 80% of cases and securing over $200 billion in protected federal funding.
• •State Enforcement Authority Over Federal Officers: California has formally asserted that state prosecutors retain authority to investigate and prosecute federal officers who commit crimes on California soil against California victims, regardless of federal immunity claims. The state opened a public misconduct reporting portal at oag.ca.gov and is pursuing state-level civil liability legislation modeled on Section 1983, filling the gap left by the weakened Bivens federal remedy for constitutional violations by federal agents.