18 U.S.C. § 922(g)
Elements
One applicable prohibited category
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person
Children status.g1 through status.g9 are alternative categories. Section 921 definitions and exclusions qualify the conviction categories; status.g5visa incorporates the statutory visa exemption. A categorical status list is not the categorical crime-of-violence method used in section 924(c). Constitutional challenges remain separate from proof of these statutory elements.
Actual or constructive possession
possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition
Firearm or ammunition under section 921
any firearm or ammunition
Possession in or affecting commerce
possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition
Knowledge of possessing the firearm or ammunition
possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition
Knowledge of the relevant disqualifying status
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person
Rehaif expressly reserved the precise proof needed for statuses other than the one before it; do not infer that awareness of every legal consequence or the federal firearms ban is required. Status knowledge must coincide with the relevant conduct.
Ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce
to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce
Receipt of the prohibited object
to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce
Received object previously shipped or transported across borders
which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce
Knowing shipping, transportation or receipt
to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce
Second Amendment limit on the unlawful-user theory applied to Hemani
(3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
Hemani (June 18, 2026), majority pp. 18-19, rejects automatically disarming this regular marijuana user based solely on that status under the government's historical-analogy theory. It reserves addicts, present intoxication, individualized dangerousness proof, particular dangerous drugs, and section 922(g)(1). This is an as-applied constitutional limitation, not textual deletion of status.g3 or a universal dangerousness element. It does not defeat liability independently established under a different prohibited status.
Section 925(a)(1) government-use firearm or ammunition exception
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person
This is an object-and-conduct-specific statutory exception, not blanket immunity for government employees or privately owned service weapons. Each claim keeps an independent status.g9 route even when government-use is present; the exception cannot override section 922(p). No section 925 offset is invented: the text line is the section 922(g) hook, and the official companion section supplies the exception via xref.
Cases
- United States v. Rogers 41 F.3d 25 (1994)
criminal; jury conviction on a one-count felon-in-possession indictment (gun found in another bedroom of the apartment where the escaped defendant was arrested); appeal on sufficiency of constructive possession plus instruction, vagueness, indictment, evidentiary and misconduct grounds (mostly plain-error review); affirmed (result: claimant-won)
- United States v. Kitchen 57 F.3d 516 (1995)
criminal; jury conviction for felon in possession of two handguns found in the bedroom of his girlfriend's house (plus a 21 U.S.C. 841 cocaine count annotated separately); defendant appeals sufficiency of the evidence on possession only; firearm conviction affirmed (result: claimant-won)
- United States v. Gilliam 934 F.3d 854 (2019)
criminal appeal after jury conviction on two § 922(g)(1) counts for the same firearm on two dates; multiplicity (merger) argument raised for the first time on appeal and reviewed for plain error; affirmed (result: claimant-won)
- United States v. Shadon Edwards 142 F.4th 1270 (2025)
criminal appeal after unconditional guilty plea to § 922(g)(1) with ACCA sentence; plea-voluntariness, Erlinger and Commerce Clause challenges all reviewed for plain error; affirmed (result: claimant-won)
- United States v. Jtton Edward Watson 142 F.4th 872 (2025)
criminal appeal after bench-trial conviction under § 922(g)(1) on stipulated facts (entered to expedite appeal of a suppression ruling); suppression ruling affirmed; sufficiency challenge held waived by the stipulation; affirmed (result: claimant-won)