Criminal Procedure - District Court - Issuance of Summonses and Arrest Warrants
HB0336 would prohibit a person from being denied the right to purchase, own, possess, or carry a firearm solely because the person is authorized to use medical cannabis under Maryland law. The bill adds a new section to the Public Safety Article stating that medical cannabis authorization, by itself, cannot be the only basis for firearm disqualification under that title.
The measure is narrowly focused on the intersection of firearms law and medical cannabis use. It does not appear to change the underlying medical cannabis program or broader firearm eligibility rules; rather, it limits one specific ground for denying firearm rights. The bill would take effect October 1, 2025 if enacted.
HB0336 would amend the Public Safety Article by adding Section 5-901, creating a statutory protection for medical cannabis patients in firearm-related decisions. In practice, it would prevent state firearm restrictions from being applied solely on the basis of lawful medical cannabis authorization under Title 36, Subtitle 3 of the Alcoholic Beverages and Cannabis Article. The bill would affect firearm purchasers, owners, possessors, and carriers who are registered or authorized medical cannabis users, as well as agencies or officials responsible for firearm eligibility determinations.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the materials supplied. Based on the bill text alone, the proposal appears to be framed as a limited rights-protection measure for medical cannabis patients rather than a broad firearms policy change. The absence of recorded discussion makes the overall sentiment difficult to assess beyond the bill’s clear pro-access purpose.
The likely point of contention is whether state firearm rights should be protected for individuals authorized to use medical cannabis, given the ongoing legal tension between cannabis use and firearms regulation. Supporters would likely view the bill as preventing categorical discrimination against lawful medical cannabis patients, while opponents may argue that cannabis authorization still raises public safety or federal-law concerns in firearm possession and carrying. Because no hearing testimony or vote history is included, the specific positions of legislators, agencies, or advocacy groups are not documented here.