Gun rights after felony convictions
Jarae Demarcus Morgan v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Petition Pending
Awaiting an order on the petition
- What it’s about
- Jarae Demarcus Morgan asks the Supreme Court to review his federal firearm conviction, challenging the ban on firearm possession by people with felony convictions and whether a gun’s past crossing of state lines supports a federal conviction.
- What's at stake
- Morgan’s challenges to his federal firearm conviction remain unresolved at the Supreme Court.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
His petition also asks for another look based on a later appeals-court ruling; it was distributed for a conference, which is not a decision to hear the case.
The petition also raises a separate question about Congress’s constitutional power to regulate conduct involving trade across state lines.
Question presented
1. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) comports with the Second Amendment? 2. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) permits conviction for the possession of any firearm that has ever crossed state lines at any time in the indefinite past, and, if so, if it is facially unconstitutional? 3. Whether at minimum this Court should grant, vacate, and remand for reconsideration because of an intervening circuit decision that may invalidate the Commerce Clause precedent on which the panel opinion below relies.
What happens next
The petition was distributed for the Court’s Dec. 4, 2026 conference, where the justices may consider whether to hear it. That does not mean the Court has agreed to hear the case or guarantee when it will act.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Brief added: Petition
More questions
- What does Morgan ask about the gun’s past travel?
- He asks whether the federal law allows conviction because a gun crossed state lines at any time in the past and, if so, whether the law is unconstitutional as written.
- Why does Morgan ask for another look at his case?
- He argues that a later appeals-court ruling may undermine an earlier rule about Congress’s power over interstate trade that the Fifth Circuit panel relied on.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.