In a major win for the Second Amendment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has ruled that a non-violent felony conviction cannot automatically justify a lifetime firearm ban under federal law. The decision limits how 18 USC § 922(g)(1)—the federal felon-in-possession statute—can be applied after Bruen.

The case involved a Mississippi man with a single prior conviction for meth possession. Years later, federal prosecutors charged him under § 922(g)(1) after he possessed a firearm. While a lower court upheld the conviction, the Fifth Circuit unanimously reversed it, finding no historical tradition that supports permanently disarming someone based solely on non-violent drug possession.

Applying the Bruen framework, the court held that firearm possession is plainly protected by the Second Amendment and that the government failed to prove a founding-era analogue allowing lifetime disarmament for simple drug possession. The panel emphasized that only the elements of the conviction—not unproven allegations—can be used to justify disarmament.

The ruling deepens a growing split among federal circuits over how felon gun bans should be analyzed, with some courts allowing blanket bans and others requiring individualized or offense-based assessments. For now, the Fifth Circuit’s decision marks a significant shift toward restoring gun rights for non-violent offenders—and signals that federal gun laws face increasing constitutional scrutiny moving forward.