In the Bruen decision, the Supreme Court ruled that gun laws should only be upheld as constitutional if a similar law existed during the era of our nation’s founding. The argument being that if the Founding Fathers accepted such a restriction, there’s little reason we shouldn’t.

That doesn’t leave a lot of ground, though. After all, some of the more popular gun control policy proposals include magazine restrictions, assault weapon bans, waiting periods, and a host of other regulations that simply weren’t a consideration back in those days.

Yet we’d be foolish to pretend officials will do nothing to defend those laws.

Take Florida’s Nikki Fried and her lawsuit to overturn the prohibition on gun ownership for marijuana users.

This case, now post-Bruen, is a glimpse into how gun laws will be defended going forward. That’s especially true if they’re successful.

And that’s a problem because the Biden administration is essentially using racism to justify gun control laws against pot users.

The historical laws being used to try and justify the prohibition of gun ownership for those who use marijuana in states where it’s legal bar gun ownership for groups such as Native Americans and Catholics. It also includes bans on “panhandlers” owning guns and those who refuse to take an oath of loyalty to the United States, but the fact that it bars an entire ethnic group and those who practice a particular religion is easily the most problematic.

You would think that the Biden Department of Justice would be hesitant to alienate one group they count on–marijuana legalization supporters–by saying that the ban is justified because of laws discriminating against minorities–another group Democrats are counting on if they hope to do well in November.

Only, they didn’t.

Instead, they’re using racist laws to justify gun laws, and I don’t see that one actually changing anytime soon, either.

That’s because when you roll back the clock, that’s what all gun control laws were on some level. They weren’t about public safety, but bigotry. They were a tool used to punish undesirable groups and help make them second-class citizens.

And the Biden administration is basically saying, “Yeah, these laws were just” simply because they’re holding them up as justification for a current law.

That’s the landscape Bruen has created.

But then the question is why anyone at the Department of Justice or the Biden administration would sign off on this. Is racism bad and all that it touched evil, as many claim, or is it only acceptable when you’re talking about gun laws?

If it’s the former, then such arguments need to die, especially since the Department of Justice can simply argue that they enforce the prohibition on gun ownership for marijuana users because pot is still a schedule 1 controlled substance and their hands are tied by federal law.

If it’s the latter, then expect to see a whole lot more racism trotted out as sound policy as more gun laws get challenged. Racism is only bad when it doesn’t benefit anti-gun Democrats, it seems.