Skip to main content

Gun rights after drug convictions

Johnson v. United States

Updated Nov 12, 2026

In brief

Where it stands
Petition Pending

Awaiting an order on the petition

No decision timeline until the Court agrees to hear the case.

What it’s about
Reggie Johnson asks the Supreme Court to review a federal law that bars firearm possession after convictions for crimes punishable by more than a year, arguing that applying it to him based on old, nonviolent drug-distribution convictions violates the Second Amendment.
What's at stake
The Court has not decided whether the federal ban can be applied to Johnson based on the convictions described in his petition.

Summary: written with AI from the case record.

What it's about

His petition was sent to a conference, but that step does not mean the Court agreed to hear the case or decided the constitutional issue.

Federal law bars people convicted of crimes punishable by more than a year in prison from possessing firearms.

Question presented

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), the federal statute that prohibits anyone who has been convicted of “a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” from possessing a firearm, violates the Second Amendment as applied to Petitioner, based solely on stale, nonviolent prior drug distribution convictions?

What happens next

The Court must decide whether to hear the petition. It was distributed for a conference on Nov. 13, 2026, but that is not a promised decision date; no oral argument is scheduled.

Documents

1

Docket activity

5
  • New analysis added

    Nov 12, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Case Briefing

    Nov 12, 2026 · Generated

  • Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata

    Nov 12, 2026 · Court records

  • Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata

    Nov 12, 2026 · Court records

  • Brief added: Petition

    Oct 5, 2026 · Court records

More questions

1
What does conference distribution mean for Johnson's petition?
The petition was sent for consideration at a Nov. 13, 2026 conference, but that does not mean the Court agreed to hear it.

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.

Checked Nov 12, 2026Methodology

Court records and filings

Reporting and analysis