Cases compared
Jimenez-Marquez v. United States vs. Alexander Wesley Ledvina v. United States vs. Meyer v. United States
No. 26-5023No. 26-5025No. 26-5027
Side by side
| Fact | Octavio Jimenez-Marquez, Petitioner v. United States | Alexander Wesley Ledvina, Petitioner v. United States | Justin Meyer, Petitioner v. United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| Docket | Octavio Jimenez-Marquez, Petitioner v. United States26-5023 | Alexander Wesley Ledvina, Petitioner v. United States26-5025 | Justin Meyer, Petitioner v. United States26-5027 |
| Status | Octavio Jimenez-Marquez, Petitioner v. United StatesDismissed | Alexander Wesley Ledvina, Petitioner v. United StatesDismissed | Justin Meyer, Petitioner v. United StatesDismissed |
| Date | Octavio Jimenez-Marquez, Petitioner v. United StatesOctober Term 2026 (2026–2027) | Alexander Wesley Ledvina, Petitioner v. United StatesOctober Term 2026 (2026–2027) | Justin Meyer, Petitioner v. United StatesOctober Term 2026 (2026–2027) |
| Question presented | Octavio Jimenez-Marquez, Petitioner v. United StatesWhether the phrase “in furtherance of” in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) is unconstitutionally vague as applied to the Petitioner. | Alexander Wesley Ledvina, Petitioner v. United States1. Whether the Second Amendment precludes applying 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3)/ the statute prohibiting the possession of firearms by unlawful users of controlled substances/ to the Petitioner and a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A), the statute criminalizing false representations with respect to information required to be kept in the records of a firearms dealer , for falsely representing that Petitioner was not an unlawful user? 2. Whether the term "unlawful user" is unconstitutionally vague? 3. Whether the court of appeals erred by deciding the constitutional issues without passing on the nonconstitutional issues? | Justin Meyer, Petitioner v. United States1. Whether after New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022) and United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024), a criminal defendant may raise an as-applied Second Amendment challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). 2. If so, whether under the Bruen/Rahimi methodology, the Second Amendment is unconstitutional as applied to a defendant like Petitioner with only non-violent priors. |
| Summary | Octavio Jimenez-Marquez, Petitioner v. United StatesOctavio Jimenez-Marquez asks the Supreme Court to review whether the words “in furtherance of” in a federal firearm law are too vague under the Constitution when used in his case. | Alexander Wesley Ledvina, Petitioner v. United StatesAlexander Wesley Ledvina’s filing challenges his conviction for making a false statement to a firearms dealer about whether he unlawfully used controlled substances. He argues that the Second Amendment bars applying the federal firearm-possession ban to him, that “unlawful user” is too vague, and that the Eighth Circuit should have addressed nonconstitutional issues first. | Justin Meyer, Petitioner v. United StatesJustin Meyer asks the Supreme Court to consider whether people with felony convictions can challenge the federal law barring them from possessing guns under the Second Amendment, and whether that challenge should succeed for someone whose prior convictions were nonviolent. |
Relationship
- Shared issue
- Gun Rights
- Why compared
- Reviewed Gun Rights tags connect these current-term public cases.
Related
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.