The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has affirmed the conviction of Texas resident George Peterson for possessing an unregistered homemade firearm suppressor, ruling that the National Firearms Act’s registration and tax requirements impose only a “modest burden” on Second Amendment rights. In United States v. Peterson, the three-judge panel accepted the Justice Department’s argument that, although suppressors qualify as protected “arms,” the 1934 statute’s paperwork and $200 tax do not amount to an unconstitutional infringement. On the same day, the Tenth Circuit signaled a different approach to firearms regulation, holding that federal prosecutions of marijuana users for gun possession may violate the Constitution if the government cannot show the individuals pose a future danger. In United States v. Harrison, the Denver-based court reversed a lower-court dismissal of charges against Oklahoma resident Jared Harrison but required prosecutors to justify disarming non-intoxicated cannabis users, casting new doubt on the breadth of 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(3). The contrasting opinions deepen a growing circuit split over how far modern gun controls can reach after the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen decision, increasing the likelihood that the high court will be asked to clarify the limits of federal firearms laws.