Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform

Student presentation exploring marijuana usage, parenting and custody disputes

Rounding out an exciting week of diverse student presentations in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar, the fourth presentation scheduled for this week will look at marijuana use and parenting. Here is how my student has previewed her topic along with some background readings:

Law and practice regarding marijuana usage and regulation often proves helpful as a way to understand greater issues in our legal system.  This is true in many areas of law, but perhaps even more so in the the practice of family law.  When considering the effect of a parent's marijuana usage during a custody dispute, it becomes apparent just how much the unfettered discretion of judges in family law jurisprudence affects both parents' cases, but also the practice of family law as a whole.

So what causes such irregularity in child custody cases between two fit parents?  The ever malleable "best interest of the child" standard which not only allows, but seemingly encourages, unabashed discretion and therefore unabashed bias from family court judges.  In many states, morality is still a key factor in best interest determinations.  In a society where the definition of morality varies from person to person, state to state, and county to county, it is impossible to guess whether a judge will consider marijuana usage to be moral or amoral.  Or perhaps a judge will opt to compare marijuana usage to cigarette smoking which acts a "tie-breaker" between both parents.  Or a judge may completely ignore the usage as commonplace and not allow it to affect their decision-making.  The impossibility of knowing creates a dangerous gamble for parents who choose to use marijuana.

This is all made worse when we are confronted with the data drought surrounding marijuana and parenting, with outdated studies examining parental marijuana usage prior to more than 15 states legalized recreational usage.  Without updated statistics and evidence, parents will find it difficult to demonstrate that their marijuana usage is mainstream and does not affect their parenting. This lack of data further stigmatizes marijuana using parents to judges who may already have biased ideas regarding weed usage.  The stigma is perhaps furthered by the media narratives of the "cannamom," a polarizing depiction of white mothers who loudly proclaim that weed makes them better parents.  Sensationalized coverage of parents who do use marijuana will only push hesitant judges further away from parents who use marijuana and allow that bias to encroach upon their best interest analysis, and thusly, parents' rights to the care of their child.

Background readings:

By Jane C. Murphy, "Eroding the Myth of Discretionary Justice in Family Law: The Child Support Experiment" (1991)

Blevins v. Bardwell, 784 So. 2d 166 (Miss. 2001).

From USA Today, "More parents are smoking pot around kids; children inhaling second-hand smoke" (May 2018)

From the BBC, "The Cannamoms Parenting with Cannabis" (Nov 2021)

Student presentation on "Entheogenesis: The Hidden History of Ancient Psychedelic Drug Rituals"

Continuing to showcase the diversity of issues covered when students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar "take over" the with their presentations, the third presentation scheduled for this week will look at psychedelic rituals. Specifically, my student will explore "Entheogenesis" and here is how she has described her topic along with background readings:

Purpose: This is an investigation regarding the origins of the Christian church and the rituals that the founders drew inspiration from at the dawn of the new age.  As the church seized power, the ancient drug rituals were eradicated and along with the 75,000 female spiritual leaders who performed them.  There are some theories as to why these women were executed, however, the main purpose of this paper is to enlighten those who plan to vote in the upcoming election.

This Fall, it is anticipated that Ohioans will vote on abortion and marijuana legalization simultaneously.  Voters may consider legalization as a "liberal" voting issue and vote against it due to a false association with pro-choice support.  Voters who anticipate voting based on their moral or religious beliefs should feel assured that legalization is not against their biblical belief origins.  The purpose of this paper is to emphasize that ancient religions promoted safe drug use and why people in power wanted to prevent this from continuing.  My conclusion is that those voting based on their religious beliefs can feel more comfortable knowing that their religious institutions were founded on spiritual drug practices.  With the legalization of marijuana and other psychedelic substances, religious followers could be introduced to long-forgotten, mystical ceremonies that make them feel closer to their God(s), such as their ancestors and predecessors did before the demonization of these practices.

Background Citations:

Muraresku, B. C. (2020). The Immortality Key: The Secret History of the Religion with No Name. St. Martin's Press.

Harris, T. (2021, October 7). The eleusinian mysteries. Hellenic Museum. Retrieved March 7, 2023,

Gillis-Smith, P., & Chapel, M. (2022, May 12). Psychedelics, spirituality, and a culture of seekership. Harvard Divinity School

Student presentation exploring legality of gun possession and marijuana use

Students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar often focus on cutting-edge issues in their class presentations on the research topics of their choice.  The second presentation slated for this week could not possibly be more cutting edge, as my student will be discussing gun possession and marijuana use.  Here is how she has described her topic along with background readings she has provided for classmates (and the rest of us):

                Although individual states have not necessarily legislated that possessing a gun is unlawful for state compliant marijuana users, cannabis’s federal illegality seems to produce this result.  The process for obtaining a gun – regardless of what state the individual resides in – requires the individual to fill out the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms’ Form 4473. Form 4473 question 21g states:

"Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?  Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreation purposes in the state where you reside."

                Consequently, individuals that are fully in compliance with the marijuana laws in their home state are being stripped of their Second Amendment right, regardless of if the plant is being used for medicinal or adult use purposes.  Therefore, marijuana users who wish to possess a gun have three options: stop using marijuana entirely, stop using state compliant marijuana and instead obtain it from an illicit source, or lie.  Although ATF agents and prosecutors report that due to limited resources, they are not inclined to prioritize the nonviolent crime of lying on a form over more serious charges, lying on the form and obtaining a gun while being a marijuana user remains a federal felony offense. 

                In the wake of the 2022 Bruen holding, litigation on this matter seems to (so far) sway in favor of gun rights activists.  But there remain many unanswered questions in this area.  The implications of either a legitimization of state-legal marijuana use on the federal level (while the plant remains on Schedule I), or of an acknowledgement that the gun control/background check process can be changed, could be massive.

Links to Background Reading:

From the Washington Post, "Lying to ATF on gun-purchase form yields few prosecutions, data shows"

From the US Attorney's Office in the Western District of Oklahoma, "Federal Prosecutors Aggressively Pursuing Those Who Lie in Connection With Firearm Transactions"

From the Reason Foundation, "Medical Marijuana Patients Are Being Denied Gun Rights"

From US Congressman Alex Mooney, "There Are Two Sides Of The Fence, Use Marijuana And Give Up Gun Ownership Or Give Up Marijuana And Be A Gun Owner."

From CNN, "Gun form liars may go on to commit gun crimes, internal ATF research suggests"

Student presentation exploring "Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome"

As regular readers know, students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar are now in the midst of "taking over" my class through presentations on the research topics of their choice.  Before their presentations, students are expected to provide in this space some background on their topic and links to some readings or relevant materials.  The first of our presentations for next week will be looking at "Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome".  Here is how my student has described his topic along with background readings he has provided for his classmates (and the rest of us):

As more American states end cannabis prohibition, regulators and lawmakers are faced with the difficult task of implementing rules to govern the growth, sale, and use of a plant that we still seem to know very little about.  Empirically and anecdotally, moderate cannabis use looks to be less harmful than use of other legal regulated substances like alcohol and tobacco.  As with nearly all substances, however, excessive chronic use of cannabis can have negative health effects.  One such side effect is Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome (CHS), a relatively rare syndrome which was first reported in Australia in 2004 and is characterized by cyclical vomiting and nausea paired with compulsive hot bathing in heavy cannabis users.  Despite being first described nearly two decades ago, many questions remain as to the actual prevalence and exact causes of the syndrome. 

This paper will discuss current data surrounding CHS and the implications this condition has for the ever-growing post-prohibition world of cannabis.  More studies are certainly necessary to determine how to prevent and treat CHS so that we can form a responsible and common-sense cannabis policy.  There is a significant possibility that current data and studies about CHS will be used to argue for continued prohibition in states that have not yet legalized the plant.  However, based on what we currently know about the syndrome, the existence of CHS is not a reason to continue prohibition.  While extremely heavy high-THC cannabis users should be concerned with developing the adverse symptoms of CHS, moderate and infrequent users do not generally develop the condition.  Furthermore, CHS is relatively rare and, if diagnosed early, has a simple cure — upon ceasing cannabis use, symptoms recede quickly and do not return until the afflicted user re-ingests cannabinoids. 

After a review of the data, the discussion will turn to possible responses to CHS rates such as THC limits, education of cannabis users, and proactive moves the cannabis industry can make to lessen the likelihood that CHS is used as a scare tactic to continue prohibition. Rather than perpetuate a misguided prohibition scheme that unfairly punishes users of cannabis, a substance empirically less harmful than legal substances such as alcohol or tobacco, we should continue to study CHS, determine with relative certainty what causes it, and educate the public on harm-reduction methods that will prevent CHS.  

Background reading

From Leafy, "Is "scromiting" from smoking weed a thing?"

From Forbes, "Science Reveals The Cannabis Industry’s Greatest Lie: You’re Buying Weed Wrong (And So Is Everyone Else)"

From JAMA Open Network, "Changes in Emergency Department Visits for Cannabis Hyperemesis Syndrome Following Recreational Cannabis Legalization and Subsequent Commercialization in Ontario, Canada"

Student presentation exploring the relationship between parental marijuana use and child abuse/neglect

Highlighting yet again the diversity of issues covered when students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar "take over" the class by giving presentations, the third presentation scheduled for this week will look at parental marijuana use and the neglect/abuse of children.   Specifically, here is how my student has described her topic along with background readings:

Data surrounding the relationship between parental marijuana use and the neglect/abuse of children is severely limited.  Even so, parental marijuana use may be used to determine the outcomes of a Child Protective Services (CPS) investigation.  Marijuana is lumped under the “alcohol and substance abuse” check box on most CPS investigation assessment forms.  This presentation will explore the different ways that parental marijuana use may factor into a CPS investigation and what role racial biases play in determining whether parental marijuana use amounts to substance abuse for purposes of an investigation.

Ohio CPS Intra-Familial Assessment form

Ohio Child Welfare Data Portal

Sylia Wilson & Soo Hyun Rhee, "Causal Effects of Cannabis Legalization on Parents, Parenting, and Children: A Systematic Review," Preventive Medicine, Volume 156 (March 2022).

Student presentation exploring "stoned drivers" and how marijuana impairs ability to drive

After a spring break week, we are back to student presentations in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar.  The first presentation will be a carry-over on marijuana and mental health from an earlier class, and then the next presentation scheduled for this coming week will take a close look at "stoned drivers" and how marijuana can impair an individual's ability to drive.  Here is how my student has described her topic and some background reading:

As recreational marijuana is legalized in more states, the question of how cannabis causes impairment becomes more of a public safety concern. This is especially true in regard to "stoned drivers" and how marijuana can impair an individual's ability to drive. Alcohol can be tested through one's blood alcohol content/level (BAC), however, there still has yet to be a consistent way to test a cannabis users impairment while driving. This presentation will explore the impact of cannabis on driving and how it compares to the impact of alcohol. Here are some links for background reading: 

Institute of Living, "Marijuana vs. Alcohol: What's The Difference in Impaired Driving?"

New York Times, "Is Driving High as Dangerous as Driving Drunk?"

Marijuana legalization loses resoundingly in Oklahoma special election

Marijuana reform ballot initiatives were on quite the hot streak between 2012 and 2020.  Though a handful of initiatives lost in this period, a far larger number prevailed.  Medical marijuana reforms almost always won in both red and blue states, and full legalization initiatives were also almost always successful (in part because they were mostly brought in blue states).  But, in 2022, as full legalization efforts were brought to red states, the reform initiative winning streak came to an end.  As detailed here, though Maryland and Missouri voters approved legalization measures, ballot initiatives failed in Arkansas and North Dakota and South Dakota.

And, as detailed in these special election results from Oklahoma, the full legalization ballot initiative losing streak continued tonight in the Sooner State.  And, with still a few votes yet to be counted, it appears that the initiative is losing big, by 25% points.  This New York Times article, headlined "With a Marijuana Shop on ‘Every Corner,’ Oklahoma Rejects Full Legalization," provides some context:

In the past few years, Oklahoma, long a solid bastion of conservatism, has quietly undergone a street-level transformation when it comes to marijuana. Dispensaries dot the landscape, with more than 400 in Oklahoma City alone. And that’s just for medical marijuana.

On Tuesday, voters across Oklahoma opted against going further, according to The Associated Press, rejecting a ballot initiative that would have legalized recreational marijuana use by adults 21 and over.

With the vote, Oklahoma joined a number of conservative states whose voters have recently decided against recreational marijuana legalization. Though Missouri approved a state constitutional amendment to allow for recreational marijuana in November, voters in other conservative states, including Arkansas, North Dakota and South Dakota, rejected similar proposals.

The vote on Tuesday was a setback for marijuana legalization proponents in Oklahoma who had anticipated that laissez-faire economic attitudes and growing support among younger Republicans would provide a pathway for the state to join a diverse assortment of 21 states and the District of Columbia in adopting legal recreational marijuana, from Alaska and the Mountain West to the coasts and parts of the Midwest.

But voters in Oklahoma, where nearly 10 percent of the population already has a medical marijuana card, appeared to have decided that the current level of access to the drug was enough. In the end, the measure failed. Sixty-three percent voted no, while 38 percent voted yes, with about 90 percent of ballots counted as of Tuesday night....

The state legislature passed a two-year moratorium on new medical marijuana business licenses last year. The Oklahoma Farm Bureau, which opposes recreational marijuana legalization, has said the existing marijuana industry in the state is already straining rural infrastructure.

Student presentation on "The Role of Medical Cannabis Programs in a Society Moving Towards Adult-Use Regulation"

Rounding out an exciting first week of student presentations in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar, the fourth presentation scheduled for the coming week will look at "The Role of Medical Cannabis Programs in a Society Moving Towards Adult-Use Regulation." Here is how my student has previewed his topic along with a bunch of background readings:

Over the last three decades, cannabis has slowly become an increasingly salient topic of debate in the United States – for a litany of different reasons.  As the plant began to shed the stigma placed on it by politicians and citizens alike, pioneering researchers in the 1980s and 1990s started to take a closer look at cannabis’ properties and effects on humans (based on hundreds of years of cannabis use as medicine in eastern cultures).  Beginning with California in 1996, states began to fulfill their purposes as laboratories of democracy with respect to cannabis through legalization of medical cannabis programs based on data collected by researchers.

However, as the debate over cannabis has progressed into more modern contexts, society has become increasingly perceptive to federal de-scheduling of the drug and implementation of adult-use policies in states across the country.  As state adult-use programs have continued to grow in numbers, there is a split in opinion as to a) how medical programs should be treated moving forward; b) whether they were ever really more than a trojan horse for the eventual full legalization of cannabis across the country; c) and whether resources should continue to be applied to their improvement and growth at all, if full legalization occurs. 

This research project will focus on addressing this debate through i) an examination of history behind medical cannabis and the data supporting cannabis’ viability as a medicine; ii) determining issues present in medical cannabis programs as adult-use programs continue to burgeon; iii) potential effects of federal de-scheduling of cannabis on medical markets; and iv) examining Ohio’s medical cannabis program as a case study on the law, policy, and politics underlying the debate -- and whether Ohio’s program is worth “fixing” with the growing imminence of an adult-use regime.

Suggested background:

Britannica ProCon.org, "Timeline on Medical Cannabis Progression" (Focus 1974 – Present) 

Antonio Waldo Zuardi, "History of cannabis as a medicine: a review" (published in 2006)

New York Times article on California’s Prop 215, "Medical Marijuana Use Winning Backing" (Oct. 1996)

Third Way Report, "America’s Marijuana Evolution" (Aug. 2017)

Hannah Carliner et al., "Cannabis use, attitudes, and legal status in the U.S.: A review" (published in 2017)

Mayo Clinic, "Medical Marijuana" 

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Chapter 4 on State of Evidence, "Therapeutic Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids" (published in 2017) 

News report on 'fixing' Ohio’s medical cannabis program, "Lawmakers look to solve issues with Ohio's medical marijuana program" (May 2022)

Student presentation exploring World Anti-Doping Agency’s approach to cannabis

Showcasing the diversity of issues covered when students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar "take over" the second half of the class by giving presentations, the third presentation scheduled for next week will look at sports.  Specifically, my student will explore "reconceptualizing WADA’s 'spirit of sport' criterion," and here is how she has described her topic along with background readings:

Reconceptualizing WADA’s “spirit of sport” criterion:

            In order to be placed on the World Anti-Doping Agency’s prohibited substance list, two out of three criteria must be met: (1) posing a health risk to athletes, (2) potentially enhancing performance or (3) violating the spirit of sport.  While the first two criterion are rooted in fact and science, the last criterion has raised controversy as a “catch-all provision” that is based on vague ideals with little operative force.

Last September, WADA announced that Cannabis would remain on the 2022 prohibited list.  Interestingly enough, WADA only cited to this third criterion, “the spirit of sport”, in their explanation as to why cannabis remains on the list.

This presentation briefly explores why cannabis does not meet the first two criterion, and then moves to attack the use of the third criterion as an overreach of WADA’s power.  After exploring the consistent drug use in sport dating back to 776 BCE, and then discussing the modern use of WADA’s therapeutic use exemption, it becomes clear that drug use is not the antithesis of “the spirit of sport”.  Finally, this presentation makes procedural recommendations to WADA and questions whether the spirit of sport criterion should be abolished, edited, or left as-is.

Suggested pre-reads:

From CBS News, "World Anti-Doping Agency rules that marijuana will remain on banned substances list"

From Athletes for Care, "It’s Time to Stop Demonizing Athletes for Using Marijuana"

From Leafly.com, "Cannabis in Sports: Unpacking Exemptions for Therapeutic Use"

From Scientific American, "Weed Shouldn’t Be Banned for Elite Athletes, Some Experts Say"

Student presentation exploring "Medical Marijuana and the Mental Health Crisis"

When students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar "take over" the second half of my class by giving presentations, they always cover a diverse array of cutting-edge topics.   So, this very first week of  presentations, a look at tax issues will be followed by a presentations focused on "Medical Marijuana and the Mental Health Crisis."   Here is how my student has described her topic along with background readings she has provided:

The mental health crisis in the United States is growing.  The stigmas surrounding mental health, as well as the barriers surrounding treatment, lead many individuals to self-soothe.  Drug use may be one method of choice. Medical marijuana could be an effective form of treatment, particularly for anxiety and panic disorders, but the lack of research and education about its efficacy and use make it an unrealistic option for many.

Though medical marijuana is growing in popularity as an alternative treatment method, it remains taboo throughout the world of practicing physicians.  Medical marijuana is not prescribed by a doctor – though it can be recommended (see Conant v. Walters, 309 F.3d 629 (9th Cir. 2002)) – and medical education does not present marijuana as a viable treatment option.  These limitations pose significant obstacles to both research and effective use, perpetuating a growing crisis with a limited number of answers.  This presentation will discuss the role of medical marijuana in treating mental illness, focusing on the systematic barriers that leave prescribers without authority and patients without aid.

Suggested Reading:

National Alliance on Mental Illness, "Mental Health By the Numbers"

Susan A. Stoner, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Institute, "Effects of Marijuana on Mental Health: Anxiety Disorders"

Anastasia Evanoff et. al, "Physicians-in-training are not prepared to prescribe medical marijuana," 180 Drug and Alcohol Dependence Volume 151 (Nov. 2017).

Student presentation exploring tax revenues raised and revenues spent after marijuana reform

As long-time readers know of this blog should know, students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar "take over" the second half of my class through presentations on the research topics of their choice.  Before their presentations, students are expected to provide in this space some background on their topic and links to some readings or relevant materials.  The first of our presentations take place next week and will be looking at state tax issues.  Here is how my student has described his topic along with background readings he has provided for  classmates (and the rest of us):

Marijuana is business.  Marijuana is revenue.  Even though recreational marijuana has only been legal for a handful of years, the United States Bureau of Economic Activity has been tracking illegal market activity in relation to generally legal market activity.   This required the BEA to attempt to track how drugs such as marijuana was impacting the economic activity within the United States.  The outcome?  The National nominal gross domestic product was raised by 0.2 percentage points.

It is clear that marijuana has had an effect on the national economy even though it is illegal.  The question now turns to; how have states who have legalized recreational use made their money through marijuana?  How much tax revenue are these states bringing in?  And, how is that money being spent in those states?

Many Americans wonder how their tax money is being spent on a day-to-day basis.  Where does the sales tax go when I go to the grocery store?  Where does twenty percent of my income go every paycheck?  Where does the tax money go after I spend money at an adult use dispensary?  Questions one and two are hard to answer.  Question three, on the other hand, is actually very easy to find out.  Many states have set up stringent tax structures relating to their adult use industry.  This may be laid out initially in their statutory plan, or the states may wait and see how much they actual earn to see how they should dispense those funds.

Either way, almost every state has a very strict dispense program.  Each state uses their marijuana tax revenue differently. Many states add some of the revenue to their general state fund.  Many divide the revenue between counties and municipalities who have a dispensary in their jurisdiction.  Many use the tax revenue for social justice programs.  A few give the money to public schools.  A few more give the money to their Department of Health for drug misuse education and programs. One is using the money to offset the now decades long decrease in tobacco tax revenue.

Marijuana has been a very profitable industry for those states who have legalized adult recreational use.  The amount of data on how states have shifted on the national pre- and post-legalization is very small. It is quite hard to see how well states are doing compared to how they could have been.  Despite this, many states have found that the illegal drug trade is not going away, so they might as well profit on the activity.  Alaska Reported more than 3% of their state revenue for fiscal year 2021 was from cannabis sales.  Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington also reported at least 1% of their total state revenue was from cannabis sales.  What does this mean? Marijuana IS BUSINESS. The question that remains, and is quite hard to answer, states who have yet to legalize recreational use have obviously seen these profits . . . how have they not legalized?

Interesting websites and articles for background

The Motley Fool, "Marijuana Tax Revenue: A State-by-State Breakdown"

Urban Institute, "State and Local Backgrounders: Cannabis Taxes"

Bureau of Economic Analysis, "Tracking Marijuana in the National Accounts"