California Joins Growing List of States to Protect Employees’ Off-Duty Use of Marijuana

By Jennifer Kearns and Danielle Dwyer

Starting January 1, 2024, employers in California will be prohibited from interfering with their employees’ off-duty use of marijuana.  On September 18, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 2188 (AB 2188), which amends California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) to add protections for employees by prohibiting employers from refusing to hire, firing, or otherwise taking an adverse action against an employee based on the employee’s “use of cannabis off the job and away from the workplace.”  Although medicinal marijuana has been legal in California since 1996, and recreational marijuana legal since 2016, the FEHA did not previously provide workplace protections for employees’ permissive use of marijuana.

AB 2188 also amends the FEHA to prohibit discrimination in hiring or any term or condition of employment based on employer-required drug screening tests that detect “nonpsychoactive cannabis metabolites” in the employee’s “hair, blood, urine, or other bodily fluids.”  The California legislature stated that because most marijuana tests can only detect whether cannabis metabolites are present, and have “no correlation to impairment on the job,” employers will need to instead rely on alternative tests to determine whether an employee is under the influence at work.  These alternative tests can include “impairment tests” that “measure an individual employee against their own baseline performance,” or tests that “identify the presence of THC in an individual’s bodily fluids.”

Although the law does not specify what constitutes an “impairment test,” it is possible the legislature was referencing tests that measure an individual’s motor functions, the visual effects of being high, and/or obvious cognitive impairments such as impaired gait or mobility, glassy eyes, changes in speech, and/or reasoning ability.  However, at this time, there is no universal definition, legally or medically, of what constitutes “impairment.”  Employers wishing to utilize impairment tests should develop a protocol that identifies the signs of impairment that will be assessed and that includes training supervisors on recognizing and documenting signs of impairment.

It is also not immediately clear upon which bodily fluid tests employers can rely given that THC can remain detectable in a person’s system weeks after use and such tests might not be able to provide objective data as to whether an employee is impaired at a specific time.  The intent of AB 2188 is to protect an employee’s off-duty use, so if an employee partakes on a Saturday and fails a drug test on a Wednesday, but is not impaired on Wednesday, taking action against that employee would be discriminatory and unlawful.  Employers that rely on physical drugs should consider incorporating impairment tests into their drug testing procedures.  A two-fold approach may better protect an employer from liability under AB 2188.  Employers should also confirm with their drug testing providers that the provider tests for the presence of THC and not nonpsychoactive cannabis metabolites.

Importantly, AB 2188 does allow employers to prohibit marijuana use on the job and/or at the worksite and specifically states that there is a “consensus” that employees “should not arrive at a worksite high or impaired.”  Employers would also still be permitted to maintain drug-free workplaces and prohibit the possession of marijuana at the workplace.  The bill exempts employees “in the building and construction trades,” and positions which require federal drug tests and/or background tests.

With the amendments to the FEHA, California joins a growing list of states that have enacted employee protections for the recreational use of marijuana including Connecticut, Illinois, Montana, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island.

Biden’s Pardon Announcement Gives a Boost to SAFE Banking Prospects

As we previously reported, on October 6, President Biden took executive action and announced that he would issue pardons for all prior Federal offenses of simple possession of marijuana, and urged state governors to do the same. As part of his executive action, Biden also directed the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Attorney General to “initiate the administrative process to review expeditiously how marijuana is scheduled under federal law,” which is currently classified as a Schedule I drug, along with heroin and LSD.

Many observers think that this executive action could usher in cannabis banking reforms. While some have noted that if cannabis is actually de-scheduled, banks and financial institutions will feel more comfortable banking with cannabis and cannabis-related companies, it seems more likely that Biden’s pardon announcement may push Congress to finally pass some version of the SAFE Banking Act.

After Biden’s announcement, Sen. Cory Booker (D, N.J.) said he was hopeful that Congress would pass federal legislation in the lame-duck session after the November election.  On that front, Booker alluded to “bipartisan movement” due to “problems in the banking industry” that many think refers to a version of “SAFE Banking Plus” or “SAFE Plus” that we previously reported senators were discussing.

The SAFE Banking Act – which has passed the House of Representatives seven times in recent years but has not been taken up in the Senate – would allow cannabis businesses to access the federal banking system and service providers to the cannabis industry such as attorneys, accountants, bankers and landlords would be permitted to accept payment from cannabis businesses without the risk of violating federal law.

“SAFE Plus” would add equity provisions to the SAFE Banking Act, ensuring equitable access to financial services for minority-owned cannabis businesses, requiring financial institutions to prove compliance with anti-discrimination laws, as well as other reforms like expungements, veterans medical cannabis access and more.

 

Biden Statement on Cannabis Scheduling: Be Careful What You Wish For …

On October 6, 2022, President Biden issued perhaps the
biggest shift in federal policy on cannabis since enactment of
the Controlled Substances Act, issuing a Statement on Marijuana Reform that:
– Pardons all prior federal offenses of simple possession or use of
marijuana;
– Urges all Governors to pardon all prior state offenses of simple
possession or use of marijuana; and
– Requests that the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the
Attorney General initiate an administrative review of marijuana’s
scheduling under the CSA.

This unexpected but welcome shift in Administration policy led to the usual bump in prices of publicly-traded cannabis companies, as investors seized on any legalization news as good news. 

But this may well be one of those be careful what you wish for moments.

Many commenters presume this move presages the federal legalization of cannabis. But astute observers understand that the devil is in the details when it comes to so-called federal legalization – and that there are many shades of legalization with very different outcomes for the current industry, legacy operators, and the various noncannabis industries waiting for a break in federal policy that will allow them to enter the cannabis space.

Notably, President Biden did not instruct his agencies to deschedule or even to reschedule cannabis.  Instead,  he “ask[ed]” HHS and DOJ “to initiate the administrative process to review expeditiously how marijuana is scheduled under federal law.”

The President noted that “… even as federal and state regulation of marijuana changes, important limitations on trafficking, marketing, and under-age sales should stay in place.” Reading the statement closely, it would seem that descheduling is an unlikely result, unless done in tandem with federal legislation creating a federal regulatory regime or authorizing states to regulate the business.

And rescheduling is not necessarily good news for the industry, either. Rescheduling could result in FDA regulation of products that would all but require cannabis companies to operate like pharmaceutical companies.

If cannabis is descheduled or rescheduled, existing state regulatory schemes that feature or include local protectionist measures would likely fall as substantial burden on interstate commerce. The only sure way to preserve existing state-based markets will be an act of Congress authorizing the states to continue to discriminate in favor of local operators and local cultivation.

The big questions following this Statement: 
– Will DEA/DOJ/HHS drag their feet yet again?
– Will marijuana be declassified altogether?
– Will it be re-classified as a Schedule II, III, IV, or V controlled substance?
– Will it remain a Schedule I controlled substance?

Any of these outcomes are possible.  And where you stand on this review very much depends on where you sit.

© 2009-2025 Duane Morris LLP. Duane Morris is a registered service mark of Duane Morris LLP.

The opinions expressed on this blog are those of the author and are not to be construed as legal advice.

Proudly powered by WordPress