United States v. Morgan – Do It For The Caselaw

Holding: The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment, rejecting the defendant's Second Amendment and Commerce Clause challenges to 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1).
Vote: Per Curiam decision granting the Government's motion for summary affirmance.
Practical effect: The decision reinforces the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1) as applied to individuals with prior burglary convictions and confirms that Commerce Clause challenges to the statute are without merit in the Fifth Circuit.

United States v. Morgan

May 18, 2026 ·25-11169 ·Per Curiam · By James Taylor

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the conviction of a defendant who pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm after a felony conviction. The court held that the defendant's Second Amendment and Commerce Clause challenges to the federal statute were foreclosed by existing precedent.

Background

Jarae Demarcus Morgan pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm after a felony conviction in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1). He appealed, arguing the statute violated the Second Amendment and exceeded Congress’s Commerce Clause authority. Morgan conceded his challenges were foreclosed but presented them to preserve the issues for further review.

The court’s reasoning

The court held that Morgan’s Second Amendment challenges were foreclosed by United States v. Diaz, which rejected a facial challenge to the statute. Regarding the as-applied challenge, the court noted Morgan had a prior felony conviction for burglary of a habitation, which is a viable predicate offense under Fifth Circuit precedent. The court also found that challenges based on the Commerce Clause were foreclosed by United States v. Jones and United States v. Alcantar.

What it means going forward

The decision reinforces the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1) as applied to individuals with prior burglary convictions and confirms that Commerce Clause challenges to the statute are without merit in the Fifth Circuit.