Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform

Student presentation examines employer drug testing policies in wake of marijuana legalization

This week brings the last class for my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar, which means we are having the last set of student presentations. The sixth and final student presentation slated for this week looks at employer drug testing policies after marijuana reforms. Here is how my student describes her topic (along with some background reading):

As marijuana becomes legal in more and more states, one of the biggest questions for employers is how to handle marijuana testing policies.  The ultimate goal is to maintain a drug-free workplace while also respecting the personal liberties of employees.  My paper will explore the pros and cons for maintaining strict drug testing policies and propose a solution on the best way for states to uniformly approach workplace drug testing.  My paper will analyze how legal states have already approached drug testing and provide an overview of how Amazon approaches drug testing to develop a proposal for best drug testing practices for employers.

On the one hand, maintaining strict marijuana policies is important for employers to avoid intoxication on the job that may result in accidents.  This is especially true for certain industries, such as public transit and manufacturing, where the likelihood of workplace accidents are higher.  Even in other industries, employers want to maintain a drug-free workplace in order to improve the quality of work produced by employees.  On the other hand, however, there are many downsides to strict marijuana drug testing policies.  It is more difficult to test for marijuana intoxication without also regulating off-the-clock activities.  This may result in employees feeling like their privacy is being violated when they are subject to regular drug testing because it restricts them from using marijuana in their off-work time.  In states where marijuana is legal, this can create a major conflict between employer interests and employee personal freedoms.

While the legal states have taken different approaches in regulating how employers drug test, California and Washington have adopted laws which restrict employers from firing employees who test positive for marijuana without also showing that the employee was actually intoxicated while working.  This strategy helps to maintain a balance between employer and employee interests.  Employers are able to prevent employees from using marijuana and being intoxicated at work, and employees are still able to use marijuana recreationally in their free time.  For these reasons, this is the best strategy for legal states and employers to adopt in regards to marijuana testing policies.

Background Reading:

Khorri Atkinson, Legal Weed Drives Companies to Relax Their Drug Testing Policies, Bloomberg Law (July 14, 2023).

Max Freedman, Cannabis at Work: How Employers are Reacting to the Legalization of Marijuana, Business News Daily (Oct. 24, 2023).

Work Health Solutions, The Pros and Cons of Workplace Drug Testing.

Levi Sumagaysay, California New Laws for 2024: Employees Get Protection for Using Cannabis, Cal Matters (Dec. 27, 2023).

Student presentation exploring policing practices after marijuana reform in Ohio

Marijuana reforms do not, of course, bring an end to issues about marijuana policing.  The fifth scheduled presentation taking place in class this week will be exploring marijuana reform's impact on policing practices and here is how my student has described his topic along with some links he provided: 

My presentation aims to explain the need for more guidance for recreational users in Ohio, particularly considering the historical policing and enforcement of cannabis prior to Issue 2.  Racial disparities persist in cannabis-related arrests, with black individuals being 3.64 times more likely than their white counterparts to face arrest for cannabis possession.  These discrepancies persist even in states where cannabis has been legalized.  With cannabis now legalized in Ohio, it is imperative for individuals to understand the parameters of the law.

To address the need for more guidance, this presentation will initially delve into the training of law enforcement officers in identifying intoxicated drivers and the criteria for compelling a driver to exit their vehicle. Subsequently, we will examine the evidence required to establish probable cause for vehicle searches pre-Issue 2. After analyzing the historical policing of cannabis, we will explore the allowances and restrictions imposed by Issue 2 on recreational users.  We will then ask ourselves what constitutes probable cause in light of Issue 2's implementation.  This will involve distinguishing between clear-cut cases and ambiguous scenarios that recreational users may encounter.  Finally, we will highlight how enhanced guidance can clarify legal boundaries for recreational users, aiding them in avoiding legal entanglements.

Background reading:

• Lauren Williams & Samuel D. Hodge Jr., The Implications of Legalized Marijuana on Establishing Probable Cause for a Warrantless Search, 66 St. Louis U. L.J. (2022).  
• The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, Searching Vehicles Without Warrants (2009).

Student presentation examines "Social Equity Programs: A Form of Reparations?"

I never think of marijuana reform, or my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar, as involving a niche subject matter  because so many aspects of the topic tap into broader issues and concerns throughout modern society.  And the fourth student presentation slated for  this week is on the kind of topic that connects a marijuana policy debate to a much larger set of concerns.  Here is how my student describes her topic (along with some background reading):

In 2014, Ta-Nehisi Coates published The Case for Reparations, calling out the lack of compensation to newly freed Black people following the Emancipation Proclamation. The article describes systematic barriers to racial equality throughout history, reviewing how discriminatory housing policies have contributed to cycles of generational poverty for Black Americans.  In 2021, the PEW Research Center found the typical white household had 9.2 times as much wealth as the typical Black household.  The Case for Reparations demonstrates these vast inequalities are due to long-term systematic racism and suggests various forms of compensation to repair the harm to African Americans. 

Using this framework of reparations, my presentation will analyze the role of social equity licensure programs in the cannabis industry.  If managed with efficacy, these programs can provide a piece of financial reparations for African Americans.  Many minoritized groups have been disparately impacted by marijuana criminalization, including communities of color, Indigenous people, and Queer communities, to name a few. This presentation will center the perspective of Black communities, tracing the harm from 17th-century Antebellum slavery to today’s marijuana legalization landscape.

Ohio’s Issue 2 enacted a Social Equity and Jobs Fund, which will allocate funds to diversify industry participation, invest in communities disparately impacted by marijuana laws, and provide criminal justice reform.  Are state cannabis licensures reigniting a national conversation of reparations?  Do these programs inspire the conversation of reparations in policy areas outside of marijuana?  Analyzing programs in Ohio, Illinois, and Michigan, this presentation explores the shortcomings and challenges of social equity programs, and potential paths forward to create reparations for African American communities.

Recommended Reading:

Coates, Ta-Nehisi, The Case for Reparations, The Atlantic. (June 2014).

Eva McKend, Hemp Roots: The History of Hemp in Kentucky, Spectrum News 1 (Oct. 2, 2019).

Jana Hrdinova & Dexter Ridgway, Mapping Cannabis Social Equity: Understanding How Ohio Compares to Other States’ Post-Legalization Policies to Redress Past Harms, Drug Enf’t & Pol’y Ctr. (Jan. 30, 2024). 

Katherine Hendy, Amanda Mauri, & Melissa Creary, Bounded Equity: The Limits of Economic Models of Social Justice in Cannabis Legislation. Contemp Drug Probl. (Jan. 13, 2023).

Rakesh Kochhar & Mohamad Moslimani, Wealth Surged in the Pandemic, but Debt Endures for Poorer Black and Hispanic Families, PEW Rsch. Ctr. (Dec. 4, 2023).

Student presentation examines impact of taxation schemes on medical marijuana

As we come down the homestretch in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar, students continue to cover terrific issues in their research and class presentations.  This week in my class, the third scheduled presentation has been given this title: "Getting Too Into the Weeds?: An Analysis of the Impact of Different Taxation Schemes on Medical Marijuana Programs and the Potential Impacts of H.B. 86 in Ohio."    Here is how the student describes her topic (along with background readings):

Medical marijuana programs are at risk of ceasing to exist to any meaningful extent in many states that have legalized recreational marijuana.  There has been a consistent trend of declining registered medical marijuana patient numbers in those states post-legalization.  While there are potentially many causes of this decline, there is one policy decision each of these states has had to make that could have a large impact on the magnitude of this decline: taxation structure.  There are three common taxation structures selected by these states: sales tax, tax exemptions, and excise tax.  All three structures are supported by reasonable policy rationales.

At the end of 2023, Ohio joined the group of states that have legalized both medical and recreational marijuana use via an initiated statute.  The Ohio Legislature, in turn, has been left with the obligation to make any changes it deems necessary to Ohio’s recreational program before it becomes fully effective.  One of the proposals that is most likely to pass is House Bill 86 (H.B. 86).  Under H.B. 86, the excise tax on recreational marijuana would increase from ten percent to fifteen percent.  This may not seem like it will impact patient registration rates in Ohio, however, the language of H.B. 86 may open the door to application of this excise tax to medical marijuana sales in Ohio if it is passed as written.

To attempt to predict what will occur to Ohio’s medical marijuana program post-legalization of recreational marijuana under the ambiguous language of H.B. 86, this paper aims to determine if there is any correlation between the type of taxation scheme a state has for medical marijuana and the likelihood of its medical marijuana program surviving.

Background Materials:

Ohio House Bill 86 (specifically Section § 5739.27(A)).

Jenn Jarecki, Bob Kinzel, & Nathaniel Wilson, "Vermont Lawmakers Consider Changing Medical Cannabis Program, Retail Potency Limits"

Carol Kokinis-Graves, "State by State Sales Tax on Cannabis"

Kevin F. Boehnke, Owen Dean, Rebecca Haffajee, & Avinash Hosanagar, "U.S. Trends in Registration for Medical Cannabis and Reasons for Use from 2016-2020: an Observational Study"

Student presentation examines the modern realities of modern marijuana politics and policy

The politics of marijuana reform is an ever-evolving topic, especially here in Ohio. And this topic is a focal point for one of my students this week in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar. As noted many tmes before, prior to their presentations, students are expected to provide here some background on their topic and links to some readings or relevant materials. The second of our presentations taking place in class this week has been described (along with background readings) this way:

When legislators and citizens find themselves at odds when contemplating policy, the citizens often turn to the ballot initiative. This is often the case in a number of states where legislators are hesitant to enact what might be divisive marijuana reform.  As such, the ballot initiative has found itself intertwined with the direct democracy engaged in marijuana advocacy.  But what happens when the marijuana conversation enters particularly conservative states, and the legislators aren't keen to accept the voters' will?  With marijuana being legalized in most liberal-leaning states, the topic has become more controversial in areas with particularly deep-seated ideas about how marijuana will negatively impact communities.

Whether through vocal opposition or more insidious procedural challenges, legislators have made their disdain for marijuana known.  The embers of the war on drugs still glow warmly in red states as the formalities of the ballot initiative are weaponized to inhibit supporters.  Signature, district, and single-subject requirements all lend opportunities to prevent meaningful reform where policy-based opposition fails.  In the shadows of the 2020 presidential election where democracy was shaken, many officials have deemed the will of the people to be inconsequential and something to be ignored where inconvenient. Moving forward, the need for federal legalization is stronger than ever, and advocates must navigate a process and game where the chips are undoubtedly stacked against them.

Background reading:

Law review article:  "Taking the Initiative: Marijuana Law Reform and Direct Democracy"

Ohio law on Initiated Statute procedures

Ohio Issue 2 reform press coverage: "Ohio GOP Senate President Lays Out Process To Revise Marijuana Law, Arguing Voters Didn’t Understand Some Provisions"

Student presention examined "The Green Rush: A Dank Guide to Navigating the Financial Haze of the Marijuana Industry”

I cannot quite believe that we are already up to the last week of student presentations in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar.  Fortunately, we still have a half-dozen presentations to finish up the semester.  As I have explained before, students are expected to provide in this space some background on their presentation topic and links to some readings or relevant materials.  The first of our presentations taking place in our last class this coming week will be looking at financial issuses in the marijuana industry.  Here is how my student has described her topic along with background readings she has provided for classmates (and the rest of us):

Background & Summary:

The legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational purposes in several U.S. states has led to the rapid growth of the cannabis industry, attracting entrepreneurs and investors eager to capitalize on this "Green Rush." However, the continued federal prohibition of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act has created a complex and often contradictory legal and regulatory environment for businesses operating in this sector. Marijuana businesses face significant challenges, including limited access to banking services, high tax burdens, and the risk of federal prosecution.  This paper aims to provide a comprehensive guide for marijuana business owners and entrepreneurs to navigate the financial complexities of the industry, covering topics such as federal and state regulations, banking challenges, interstate commerce issues, cybersecurity, and the future outlook for the industry.  By offering practical insights and strategies, the paper seeks to empower industry participants to make informed decisions, mitigate risks, and seize opportunities in this dynamic and rapidly evolving market.

The rapid growth and legalization of the marijuana industry in the United States have created a complex financial landscape for businesses operating in this sector.  The paper aims to provide a comprehensive guide for marijuana business owners and entrepreneurs to navigate the financial complexities of the industry, including:

1.  Federal regulations and policies, such as the Controlled Substances Act, the Cole Memorandum, FinCEN guidance, and Internal Revenue Code Section 280E, which have significant implications for marijuana businesses and financial institutions.

2.  State-level regulations and policies, including the patchwork of mhttps://www.dea.gov/drug-information/csaarijuana laws across the country, state-specific financial regulations and guidelines, and the challenges in accessing banking services.

3.  Interstate commerce and money transfer issues arising from the conflict between state-level legalization and federal prohibition, as well as potential solutions such as cryptocurrency and blockchain technology.

4.  Cybersecurity and fraud prevention best practices to protect sensitive financial data and prevent fraudulent activities in the cash-intensive marijuana industry.

5.  Future outlook and potential legislative changes, including proposed legislation like the SAFE Banking Act and the MORE Act, which could significantly impact the industry's growth and development.

The paper also emphasizes the importance of staying informed, adaptable, and proactive in this rapidly evolving industry, as well as the potential for the marijuana industry to drive economic growth, create jobs, and generate tax revenue for communities and social programs.

Related Links:

For information on federal regulations and policies:

DEA, "The Controlled Substances Act"

DOJ, "The Cole Memo" (2013)

US Treasury Department, "FinCEN's Guidelines" (2014) 

US Code: "IRS Code 280E" 

For information on state-level regulations and policies:

National Conference of State Legislatures, "States Medical Cannabis Laws"

For information on proposed federal legislation:

"The SAFE Banking Act"

"The Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act"

Student presentation examines marijuana reform's impact on drug trafficking over southern border

The echoes and impacts of marijuana reform are always notable (and unpredictable), and one of my students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar is exploring marijuana reform's impact on broader drug trafficking over southern border. The fifth scheduled presentation in my class is described this way (along with background readings):

Marijuana, historically, was a highly-trafficked drug into the United States from both the Canadian and Mexican borders.  In the wake of legalization, both for medicinal and recreational uses, the desire for imported marijuana has declined, and other drugs have become more desirable for trafficking.  Marijuana legalization has contributed to Mexico's adaptation to alternative drug trafficking routes along the U.S.-Mexico border, and new markets have grown significantly.  With California, Arizona, and New Mexico having legalized marijuana, the need for trafficked marijuana has placed a burden on the southern border in Texas. Legalization in these states not only contributed to this migratory shift and increased seizures in Texas, but also further deepened the dent in the profits of organized crime groups in Mexico.

The shift seen in marijuana trafficking has not halted the illegal transport of drugs.  As popularity in illicit substances such as fentanyl and methamphetamine grow, southern border states are experiencing heightened volumes of the trafficking of such synthetic drugs.  The trafficking of illicit substances impacts many parts in a supply chain, from finished product to money, both in financing illicit organizations, and for the cost of protecting the southern border and the American public from illicit drugs.

Background materials:

InSight Crime, With Legalization, Marijuana Trafficking Routes Evolve Along US-Mexico Border (Dec. 13, 2022).

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CBP: America's Front Line Against Fentanyl (March 6, 2024).

Student presentation: "Chronic pain management: Exploring the relationship between marijuana, and opioid use"

As I have mentioned before, I am always pleased when students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar focus for their research and class presentations on medical marijuana topics. It is certainly understandable, but still problematic, that medical-related issues get now seemingly a lot less attention that adult-use issues. But this week in my class, the fourth scheduled presentation will be on cannabis and pain management.  Here is her description of the topic (along with background readings):

While marijuana use for its’ medicinal properties is nowhere near a new piece of conversation, there are several areas of this topic that are under-researched.  In the U.S. 51.6 million adults suffer from chronic pain.  Many of these adults are prescribed opioids to lessen the pain.  Lessening the pain by no means actually eliminates the pain, and that is where marijuana comes into play.

The relationship between marijuana, and opioid use can be quite complex, especially considering the U.S.’s history, and present issues with misuse of opioids.  Understanding how these two drugs interact together is pertinent to helping people who suffer from chronic pain.  Generally, studies have found that using marijuana has lessened patient dependency with opioids when used as a pain management tool.

However, being able to use marijuana as a gap filler or pain management tool is not so easily done.  Recreational, and medicinal legalization in a state does not guarantee that a person will be able to access this type of approach.  State laws play a big role in this issue.  My paper aims to explore why people on opioids are turning to marijuana to supplement their pain management, the results of such, risks associated, which demographics are affected at disparate rates, as well as the various laws, and regulations that hinder the ability to safely use marijuana as a pain management tool.

Related Links: 

For information on relevant state laws pertaining to doctors in this space: "‘Conscience’ Bills Let Medical Providers Opt Out of Providing a Wide Range of Care."

For information on results of using marijuana as a pain management tool while on opioids: "Cannabis as a Substitute for Opioid-Based Pain Medication: Patient Self-Report."

Student presentation examines marijuana's history in sports and in the sports industry

Highligthing the diversity of issues covered when students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar "take over" the second half of the class through their presentations, the third presentation scheduled for the coming week will look at sports.  Specifically, this student will explore "history of marijuana in sports, both domestically and internationally, as well as the impact of marijuana legalization in the sports industry," and here is how he describes his topic along with background readings:

The sports industry has frequently found itself in and around the conversations regarding marijuana use and regulation.  Particularly in the US, many prominent athletes over the years have been vocal advocates for the legalization of cannabis both medically and recreationally.  Not only have athletes made the news for their advocacy of cannabis legalization, but on multiple occasions, athletes have received negative publicity for their use of cannabis.  My paper and presentation, will discuss the history of marijuana in sports, both domestically and internationally, as well as the impact of marijuana legalization in the sports industry. 

The most important organization when it comes to marijuana use in sports is the World Anti-Doping Association (WADA).  WADA was created in 1999 and subsequently established the world anti-doping code in 2003.  As the name of the organization and code indicate, WADA was generally focused on those drugs that have performance enhancing effects, but also banned those substances that go against the “spirit of sport.”  Since the inception of the Code in 2003, the topic of cannabis as a banned substance has come under fire on multiple occasions.  In 2021, the inclusion of cannabis on the list drew wide-spread media attention and led WADA to conduct an extensive review of the substance.  Despite this, WADA maintained their position of having cannabis banned.

While WADA is a prominent voice in the sports world, and its code has been adopted by more than 660 organizations, is not applicable across all sports and leagues.  In particular, the leagues we are most accustomed to in the US (NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, NCAA) do not abide by the WADA code.  Instead these organizations apply their own rules.  As such, they have been more open to adapting with the times and changing their restrictions on marijuana use. 

Background Reading:

WADA, Who We Are 

WADA, The Prohibited List

WADA, Summary of Major Modifications and Explanatory Notes for 2023 Prohibited List

Marijuana Moment, NCAA Panel Formally Recommends Removing Marijuana From Banned Substances List For College Athletes (Sept. 22, 2023)

Axios, Where it stands: Weed policies by U.S. sports league (Oct 20, 2021).

Student presentation examines psychedelics as the next fronteir of drug policy reform

It's opening day for the MLB, but we are mid-season for my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar as students continue their "take over" of my class through presentations on the research topics of their choice.  As noted many tmes before, prior to their presentations, students are expected to provide here some background on their topic and links to some readings or relevant materials. The second of our presentations taking place in class next week will be looking at psychedelics and the next class of drugs subject to modern reforms.  Here is how my student has described her topic along with background readings she has provided:

As marijuana policy continues to reform and the stigma surrounding it begins to fade, the legality of other drugs has come into question, and the policies behind them have slowly begun to reform as well.  After California legalized medical marijuana in 1996, within the next four years several states followed suit.  The trend of cannabis legalization continued with Colorado becoming the first state to legalize marijuana for recreational purposes in 2014.  This trend of cannabis reform in the last 30 years or so has led researchers, policymakers and everyday citizens to dive into the research of various other drugs that have potential medicinal and recreational use.

The largest group of drugs that has drawn a focus is psychedelics. Psychedelic drugs are a broad category that could encompass anything from cannabis itself to LSD to MDMA.  This presentation will focus on the most common drugs people often think of when it comes to psychedelics – psilocybin (magic mushrooms,) and LSD. As well as two other drugs that have found their way into the spotlight of reform – MDMA (ecstasy,) and ketamine.  My presentation will start with an overview of the drugs above, their medicinal or lack of medicinal purposes, the research surrounding them, and different models of legalization, focusing on the challenges and progress ongoing in various states and cities including Oregon, Colorado and California.

Background reading:

Siegel JS, Daily JE, Perry DA, Nicol GE. Psychedelic Drug Legislative Reform and Legalization in the US, JAMA Psychiatry (Jan. 1, 2023)

Smith WR, Appelbaum PS. Two Models of Legalization of Psychedelic Substances: Reasons for Concern. JAMA (Aug. 24, 2021)

Mapping Psychedelic Drug Policy Reform in the United States (March 14, 2024)

Gael Girón S, Lang B, LeMaster S, Matthews K, McAllister S. Denver Psilocybin Mushroom Policy Review Panel.  Comprehensive Report (2021)

Student presentation examines marijuana legalization and local regulations

Sadly, we are now into our final few weeks of students presentaions in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar.  Excitingly, we still have nearly a dozen more presentations coming.  As I have explained before, students are expected to provide in this space some background on their presentation topic and links to some readings or relevant materials. The first of our presentations taking place in class next week will be looking at "Legalized Marijuana and Local Regulation." Here is how my student has described his topic along with background readings he has provided for classmates (and the rest of us):

The growing trend towards full legalization of recreational marijuana throughout the United States has resulted in a variety of quirks in different states’ legislative schemes. One important quirk is laws that allow municipalities to ban or heavily regulate legal marijuana in conflict with state-wide legalization.

Local control can be broadly grouped into two categories.  First, there is existing local control that applies neutrally to marijuana vendors and other businesses within a municipality as implemented through local health and zoning codes.  Second, there are proposed or implemented laws that allow localities to ban or heavily restrict the establishment and operation of marijuana vendors within municipal limits that would otherwise be permissible under state law.  While the first method of regulation should be allowed, the second method of regulation threatens to perpetuate the issues with illegal marijuana that full legalization aims to solve.  Between existing zoning rules and state-specific local bans, this issue affects most people in states with legal marijuana.

My presentation will focus on the background behind local marijuana bans, the interaction between federalism and localism, and the problems that legalization seeks to address.  I will then review the laws in states that have either allowed for local bans or are proposing local bans and the measurable effects of those laws.  Finally, I will analyze the effects of allowing bans on a local level versus blanket legalizations and develop recommendations for policymakers.

Suggested Sources:

Article: Cannabis Legalization In State Legislatures: Public Health Opportunity And Risk, 103 Marq. L. Rev. 1313 (2020)

Article: Cannabis Capitalism, 69 Buffalo L. Rev. 215 (2021)

Resource Page:  Investopedia, Marijuana Laws by State (2024).

Article: American Edibles: How Cannabis Regulatory Policy Rehashes Prohibitionist Fears and What to Do About It, 44 Seattle U. L. Rev. 915 (2021)  

Resource Page: Curate, Local Government Impact on Cannabis Industry (2024)

Student presentation exploring Delta-8 THC products

As noted in this prior post, there is an on-going debate in Ohio (as well as in many other jurisdictions) about so-called Delta-8 or "intoxicating hemp" products.  Helpfully, the last planned presentation for this week in my Marijuana Law seminar is going to cover issues surrounding Delta-8, and here are some resources that she provided for some background:

Background information about Delta-8:

Leas, EC. The Hemp Loophole: A Need to Clarify the Legality of Delta-8-THC and Other Hemp-Derived Tetrahydrocannabinol Compounds. Am J Public Health. 2021 Nov;111(11):1927-1931.

FDA and DEA Regulation:

FDA advises against use: 5 Things to Know about Delt-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol – Delta-8 THC. Food and Drug Administration. May 5, 2022.

Coverage of warning letters sent to Delta-8 brands by FDA.

Good summary of case interpreting "hemp" to include Delta-8 products under Farm Bill 

Good summary of possible DEA Interpretation

Coverage of the push from the states for federal regulation

Report on study regarding Delat-8 use and state regulation

Student presentation explores "three controversial substances: trans fat, opioids, and marijuana"

I start my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar by encouraging students to consider whether and how marijuana is similar to other products and activities.  I am thus excited that another presentations taking place in my class this week will be exploring how marijuana compares to some other "constroversial substances."  Here is how my student has described her topic along with some links he provided:

Marijuana has been undergoing a revolution over the last two decades. In 2012, Colorado and Washington were the first two states to legalize recreational marijuana.  By 2024, 22 other states have followed suit.  On the federal level, in August 2023, the Department of Health and Human Resources recommended rescheduling marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act.  Since then, President Joe Biden has been under mounting pressure to follow through on his campaign pledge to decriminalize marijuana.  In wake of this movement, many advocates and opponents for marijuana reformation have looked at other consumer industries to see how the growing marijuana market may impact society.

The most notable, comparable industries looked at have been Big Tobacco and Big Alcohol, considering the prevalence, similarities, and health concerns of these substances to marijuana.  But in looking beyond these comparisons, there are two other industries have caused ongoing public health crises in American society that the marijuana market should learn from.  The obesity epidemic and opioid epidemic, spurred by trans fat and prescription/illicit opioid use respectively, have cost Americans hundreds of thousands of dollars and lives.  My paper will explore the similarities and differences of the histories, uses, and legal landscapes of these three controversial substances: trans fat, opioids, and marijuana. By examining how trans fat and opioids catalyzed their own respective epidemics, the marijuana industry can integrate proactive measures to safely regulate their products and mitigate the potential harm that comes from marijuana use.

Background Readings:

For a brief overview of the history and regulation of trans fat: "Shining the Spotlight on Trans Fats"

For a brief overview of the history and consequences of the opioid epidemic in the United States: "The Opioid Epidemic in the United States"

Reviewing the legal anatomy of product bans, specifically studying trans fat and marijuana:  "The Legal Anatomy of Product Bans to Protect the Public's Health"

Compiling and reviewing the impact of legalized marijuana to opioid overdose mortality: "State marijuana laws and opioid overdose mortality"

Student presentation to explore automatic and petition-based expungement in Ohio

Because I came into the marijuana space as a result of my long-standing interest in criminal justice reform, it is always exciting when a students in my Marijuana Law, Reform & Policy class decide to explore criminal law issues in their presentations and papers.  And the fourth presentation slated for this week is on a topic that is especially timely here in the Buckeye States, and here is how "The Intersection of Automatic and Petition-Based Expungement in Ohio" is described by my student (along with background readings):

Expungement is a process that allows individuals to clear their criminal records of certain offenses.  The benefit of expungement provides individuals with a fresh start by removing the barriers associated with having a past conviction.  The process of expungement varies from state to state regarding eligibility, offenses covered, and procedures.  Given the uprise in marijuana legalization, some states have implemented automatic expungement provisions to address past harms and reduce the impact of convictions.  However, Ohio’s approach to expungement remains petition-based which in turn results in low utilization among eligible individuals. 

One of the concerns in Ohio is the lack of resources needed to implement a successful automatic expungement process.  As seen in New Jersey, backlogs of expungement requests illustrate the implications and frustrations that individuals face while they wait for their records to be expunged.  Despite the benefits of expungement, such as increased employment, housing, and education – there are also concerns about potential risks to public safety.  Automatic expungement can streamline the process and increase accessibility, but this relief will need safeguards against unintended consequences.

My presentation focuses on the interplay between automatic and petition-based expungement.  As Ohio lawmakers continue the expungement conversation my first recommendation would be a dual approach that utilizes automatic relief for misdemeanors.  This process would still use the petition-based approach for felonies or cases with complex circumstances but would incorporate automatic expungement for misdemeanors.  This balance would help address public safety concerns about mistakenly expunging other non-marijuana convictions while increasing the utilization rate for eligible individuals.  I would also recommend allocating funding for expungement programs and the prosecutor’s office to increase awareness, optimize the process, and maintain the importance of record-clearing policies.

Recommended Reading:

1. Jana Hrdinova & Dexter Ridgway, Mapping Cannabis Social Equity: Understanding How Ohio Compares to Other States’ Post-Legalization Policies to Redress Past Harms, Drug Enf’t & Pol’y Ctr. (Jan. 30, 2024). 

2. Margaret Love, Jana Hrdinova & Dexter Ridgway, Marijuana Legalization and Record Clearing in 2022, Drug Enf’t & Pol’y Ctr. (Dec. 19, 2022). 

3. Dana Difilippo, New Jersey state police’s expungement backlog of 46K cases spurs lawsuit, N.J. Monitor (Oct. 23, 2023). 

4. J.J. Prescott & Sonja Starr, The Power of a Clean Slate, CATO (2022).

5. Dea Cortney & Samuel Edmunds, Understanding Expungement Under the New Cannabis Law, 80-SEP Bench & B. Minn. 25 (Sept. 2023).

Student presentation examines "cannabis’ new home in the wellness industry"

I am always excited by the wide range of diverse topics that students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar focus upon for their research and class presentations. And, these days, when it seems many folks have moved beyond having any interest in (always interesting) medical marijuana topics, I get excited that students remeain eager to keep exploting modern medical-related issues.  The third presentation slated for this week is in this space, and my student has titled her presentation as "Modern Medical Marijuana: Cannabis’ New Home in the Wellness Industry." Here is her description (along with background readings):

Many medical professionals and patients alike have long considered Cannabis to be medicinal; it has been used in a multitude of medical capacities – from alleviating side-effects of cancer treatment to helping manage chronic pain.  While medical marijuana schemes were the predominant way of consuming cannabis legally in the United States, there is a paradigm shift now that legal adult-use recreational cannabis is growing in popularity. How does the medical marijuana industry evolve from here?  The answer may lie in the increasingly powerful and popular wellness industry.

 

In 2022, the global wellness industry amounted to $5.6 trillion dollars.  Notably, Public Health, Prevention, & Personalized Medicine amounted to $611 billion and Traditional & Commentary Medicine rang in at $519 billion. Cannabis consumption has become an increasingly prevalent tool in the wellness space, especially for helping to calm the nervous system and serve as an alternative to alcohol consumption – “California Sober” is a trendy new “healthy” way to indulge, and THC infused drinks for “relaxing” are booming in production.  However, some research suggests that substituting alcohol with marijuana is just an exchange of toxic effects.  So where does this leave “medical” marijuana in 2024; should we consider Cannabis to be a medicinal pain-management and disease-curing tool?  Or is it a healthier vice with some tangible wellness benefits?  This paper evaluates the medicinal properties of marijuana, its current place in the wellness system and marketability as a “healthy” indulgence, the wellness benefits of Cannabis, as well as some concerns in viewing the substance as part of this new wellness push.

Suggested Reading:

• Todd Suritzky, Beyond deficit and harm reduction: Incorporating the spectrum of wellness as an interpretive framework for cannabis consumption, 60 INT. J. OF DRUG POL. 18-23 (2018). 
• Ernetso Londoño, What Does Being Sober Mean Today? For Many, Not Full Abstinence, NY TIMES (Feb. 4, 2024)
• Sasha Rogelberg, Gen Z’s buyers’ strike on alcohol turns ‘Dry January’ into skyhigh new year, YAHOO! FINANCE (Feb. 3, 2024),
• Allana Akhtar, Cool girls don’t drink alcohol anymore, Business Insider (Jan. 10, 2023)
• Global Wellness Institute, Wellness Economy Statistics & Facts, GLOBAL WELLNESS INSTITUTE (2023).
• Lisa Jarvis, Going “California Sober” May Be Bad For Your Heart, BLOOMBERG (February 28, 2024), .

Student presentation examines for federal marijuana rescheduling could impact immigration enforcement

March madness continues in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar as students continue their "take over" of my class through presentations on the research topics of their choice. As noted many tmes before, before their presentations, students are expected to provide here some background on their topic and links to some readings or relevant materials. The second of our presentations taking place in class next week will be looking at how federal marijuana rescheduling could impact immigration enforcement. Here is how my student has described her topic along with background readings she has provided for classmates (and the rest of us):

On August 29, 2023, the Department of Health and Human Services released its recommendation to reschedule marijuana to a schedule III drug instead of its current standing as a schedule I drug.  The Department found that marijuana meets the three criteria for schedule III drugs: (1) it has less of a potential for abuse than schedule I and II drugs; (2) abuse of marijuana may lead to low or moderate physical dependence or high psychological dependence; and (3) it has a currently accepted medical use in the United States.  The Drug Enforcement Administration is currently investigating this recommendation and is expected to make a final decision of whether or not to reschedule by the November election.  While rescheduling would likely lead to greater medical access for U.S. citizens, it is unclear how it could affect immigration enforcement.

Currently, immigration law places harsh consequences on immigrants for marijuana activity.  Even in states where marijuana is decriminalized and or medically legalized, immigrants can be deported, found inadmissible, and barred from naturalization if they are caught possessing marijuana.  If marijuana is rescheduled, would immigration enforcement necessarily change?  Can immigrants still be found to have “moral turpitude” for involvement with marijuana once it is recognized the have medical legitimacy?  How may a second Biden versus Trump administration affect immigration enforcement after rescheduling?   My paper aims to discuss how the potential rescheduling may affect the disparate enforcement and consequences of marijuana criminalization on immigrants.

Some reading:

Congressional Research Service, Legal Sidebar, Legal Consequences of Rescheduling Marijuana, Jan. 2024

Marijuana Moment, DEA Tells Congress It Has ‘Final Authority’ On Marijuana, Regardless Of Health Agency’s Schedule III Recommendation, Jan 2024

Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Immigrants and Marijuana, May 2021

Washington Post, Trump vs. Biden on immigration: 12 charts comparing U.S. border security, Feb 2024

Politico, She Immigrated Legally. She Married a U.S. Citizen. But She Was Denied Citizenship for Working in Legal Cannabis, Dec 2023

Student presentation on marijuana reform's impact on Fourth Amendment doctrines

The next few weeks are going to bu busy ones in my  Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar, as we have 17(!) student presentation scheduled.  That means, as often noted before, this blog will soon have 17 more student desceriptions of their topic and  some links for background reading.   The first schedule presentations taking place in class next week will be exploring marijuana reform's impact on Fourth Amendment search doctrines.  Here is how my student has described his topic along with some links he provided:

The Fourth Amendment protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures.” U.S. Const. amend IV.  Warrantless police searches are therefore “per se unreasonable.” Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 357 (1967).  But that per se rule is not without its exceptions. Police can, for example, search a person’s car without a warrant if they have probable cause to do so. They can also stop and (sometimes) frisk a person based on a reasonable suspicion “that criminal activity may be afoot.” Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 30 (1968).  Seeing or smelling marijuana might provide police with just the level of suspicion they need to conduct a search without first obtaining a warrant. But what if marijuana is no longer an automatic indicator of criminal activity?

Courts and legislatures in states like California, Colorado, and Oregon have had to grapple with just that question.  The legalization of marijuana has unsettled Fourth Amendment law in those and other jurisdictions.  It is not immediately clear anymore what exactly police can do when they encounter marijuana.  In many instances, the answer may be nothing at all.  This presentation will outline Fourth Amendment law as it relates to marijuana.  It will then sketch how the law has evolved in states where marijuana is now perfectly legal.  Finally, it will cover possible approaches a state can take to modify search and seizure law following full legalization — including (1) do nothing, (2) leave the issue for courts to resolve, or (3) pursue change through legislation.

Additional Reading:

• Lauren Williams & Samuel D. Hodge Jr., The Implications of Legalized Marijuana on Establishing Probable Cause for a Warrantless Search, 66 St. Louis U. L.J. (2022).  

• Claire J. Rice, Failing the Sniff Test: Using Marijuana Odor to Establish Probable Cause in Illinois Post-Legalization, U. Chi. L. Rev. Online (Sept. 23, 2022), 

• Kyle Jaeger, Police Can’t Search You for Smelling Like Marijuana Under New Virginia Law, Marijuana Moment (Nov. 10, 2020).

• People v. McKnight, 446 P.3d 397 (Colo. 2019).

Student presentation examines racial disparities in cannabis enforcement and reform's impact

As recent noted, March is when students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar "take over" my class through presentations on the research topics of their choice.  Before their presentations, students are expected to provide here some background on their topic. The second of our presentations taking place in class this week will be exploring "Racial Disparity in Marijuana Law Enforcement and the Impact of Legalization." Here is how my student has described her topic along with some links she provided:

My presentation, Racial Disparity in Marijuana Law Enforcement and the Impact of Legalization, explores the existence and implications of racial disparity in marijuana-related arrests and convictions.  This exploration begins with a brief overview of racial disparity, including a couple statistics to portray the true difference in race-based marijuana arrests and convictions.  We will then walk through a quick history of marijuana law, highlighting the deep roots that racial biases play in the push for harsher drug laws.  We will move to the effects that marijuana arrests and convictions have on an individual before examining factors today that contribute to the racial disparities.  After that, we will move on to legalization efforts in today’s political climate and the impact that such legalization has on racial disparities.  The presentation wraps up with a brief analysis of current proposed social equity efforts aimed to correct the racial disparities, highlighting the current debates in Ohio’s proposed laws.

Backround:

1. ACLU commentary, "Marijuana Legalization Is a Racial Justice Issue" (2019)

2. ACLU report, "A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform" (2020)

3. Brookings commentary, "Marijuana’s racist history shows the need for comprehensive drug reform" (2020)

4. NORML fact sheet, "Racial Disparity In Marijuana Arrests"

Student presentation examines the cannabis appellation program in California

Following a well-derserved Spring Break, students in my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar get back to "taking over" my class through presentations on the research topics of their choice.  As I have explained before, 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 taking place in class next week will be looking at the cannabis appellation program in California. Here is how my student has described his topic along with background readings he has provided for classmates (and the rest of us):

Barrowing a powerful tool from California’s native wine-industry, marijuana-renowned regions in the Golden State will soon be able to cash in on their reputations as high-quality cannabis cultivators.  A state program will permit the creation and enforcement of unique appellations of origin for cannabis products.  According to the California Department of Food and Agriculture, an appellation of origin is a protected designation that identifies the geographical origin of a product and typically includes production requirements.  As the rules take effect, the various terroirs of Humbolt County may become as widely recognized for marijuana as the subregions of the Napa Valley have become known for wine.  North Mendocino Coast Cannabis may eventually pack the promotional punch of Bordeaux, Gruyere Cheese, and Prosciutto di Parma.

My research will examine how an appellation program works as well as the general benefits and costs of one to producers, consumers, and other stakeholders.  While California is the first state to launch a Cannabis Appellation Program, this paper will discuss whether the legal tool of appellation would benefit other states given the current political, legal, and economic forces at play across the country.  California’s unique status as a first mover in the space, its legislative and regulatory knowledge of wine appellation programs, and the likely high value of its appellations compared to other states will be considered.  In the legal context, the impact of increased state legalization and federal rescheduling will be explored.  While potential federal rescheduling of marijuana may not immediately lead to interstate commerce, the federal government’s softer stance on the substance along with an increase in states legalizing recreational marijuana, may lead to a rise in legal products illicitly transported across state borders.  As more products from places like California and Colorado find their way across the country, producers in those states may desire to prevent the misrepresentation of a cannabis good’s origin to protect the brands of cultivators at home.  This paper will explore these dynamics and others to establish whether an appellation program makes sense outside of California.

Additional reading:

Mabi Vásquez, 3 Benefits And 3 Disadvantages Of The Designations Of Origin, Agavache (2021)

Cannabis Appellations Program (CAP), California Department of Food and Agriculture

Cannabis Appellations Program Proposed Text of Regulations, California Department of Food and Agriculture (2024)

Designation of Origin Regulations Comment Letter, Origins Council (2022)

Marcus Crowder, New appellations would celebrate individual terroir of cannabis strains, San Francisco Chronicle, Sept 22, 2020

Student presentation reviewing regulatory approaches to wide array of sybstances

The third of a set of student presentations taking place in my Marijuana Law, Policy and Reform class this week will be a wide array of regulatory structures for a wide array of drugs. Here is how my student has described his topic along with background readings he has provided for classmates (and the rest of us):

This project critically examines the historical and contemporary regulatory approaches adopted by the U.S. government towards the control and management of various drugs and substances, including alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, opioids, crack/cocaine, methamphetamine, synthetic drugs, and psilocybin. Through a comprehensive review of legislative actions, enforcement strategies, and public health outcomes, we identify core errors and missteps in drug regulation, categorizing them into themes such as the influence of political and industry agendas, racial biases and social inequalities, disregard for scientific evidence, reactive regulatory measures, overreliance on prohibition and criminalization, underestimation of cultural and social factors, and the lack of early intervention and harm reduction strategies.

By dissecting these errors, the paper illuminates the multifaceted consequences of these regulatory approaches, including the perpetuation of social injustices, the exacerbation of public health crises, and the inefficacy of prohibitionist policies. The analysis is underpinned by an interdisciplinary framework that integrates insights from public health, social sciences, policy analysis, and law, offering a holistic understanding of the complexities inherent in drug regulation.

Drawing on the lessons learned from these regulatory missteps, evidence suggests a forward-looking perspective on drug policy that emphasizes the importance of science-based approaches, equity, harm reduction, and adaptability to changing societal attitudes and technical understandings. We argue for a paradigm shift towards policies that prioritize public health and social welfare, grounded in a nuanced understanding of the socio-economic and cultural dimensions of drug use. The paper concludes with actionable recommendations for policymakers, suggesting a roadmap for reforming drug regulation in a manner that addresses past errors while meeting the challenges of the future.

Background Materials on Specific Drugs:

Tobacco: Cummings KM, Ballin S, Sweanor D. The past is not the future in tobacco control. Prev Med. (Nov 2020) 

Alcohol: Mark Thornton, Alcohol Prohibition Was a Failure, Cato Inst., (July 17, 1991)  \

Marijuana:  Wikipedia entry on legal history of cannabis 

Opioids: Jones MR, Viswanath O, Peck J, Kaye AD, Gill JS, Simopoulos TT. A Brief History of the Opioid Epidemic and Strategies for Pain Medicine. Pain Ther. (June 2018) ;  How FDA Failures Contributed to the Opioid Crisis, Andrew Kolodny, MD – AMA J Ethics. (August 2020) 

Crack/cocaine: Racial Double Standard in Drug Laws Persists Today, Equal Justice Initiative (12/9/2019);  Twenty Years of the Unjust Federal Crack Cocaine Law, ACLU, (Oct. 2006)

Methamphetamine: PBS Frontline, Timeline on "history and spread of meth"

Psilocybin: van Elk M, Fried EI. History repeating: guidelines to address common problems in psychedelic science. Ther Adv Psychopharmacol. (Sept 2023)

Synthetic Drugs (Fentanyl, Bath Salts, Spice (K2), etc.): Vera Institue, In the Fentanyl Crisis, Lawmakers Are Making the Same Mistakes (Aug 2023)