New Jersey’s adult-use marijuana legalization law explicitly precludes employers from taking any adverse actions against workers “simply for testing positive for cannabinoid metabolites, or for using cannabis, so long as it is not used during the workday and the employee is not intoxicated or impaired at work.”
It’s not only consumers’ 2nd Amendment rights that are under assault. Historically, governments have sought to deny cannabis consumers many other rights as well, including their right to use the medicine that works best for them, or to exercise their freedom to choose to relax with a substance that’s objectively safer than alcohol. And every step of the way, NORML has been there to fight back on their behalf.
“The historical analogs the government identifies concern temporary restrictions on carrying or firing weapons while intoxicated or on persons adjudged dangerous — not blanket bans on all users of a disfavored substance.”
“Neither past nor current cannabis use should automatically preclude someone from legal protections explicitly provided by the US Constitution.”
“Neither past nor current cannabis use should automatically preclude someone from legal protections explicitly provided by the US Constitution.”
This ruling is “a huge win for freedom. No medical cannabis patient should have to choose between their rights to their medicine or their right to bear arms.”
Justices determined, “Marijuana user or not, [the defendant] is a member of our political community and thus has a presumptive right to bear arms. By infringing on that right, 922(g)(3) contradicts the Second Amendment’s plain text.”
“In short, our history and tradition may support some limits on an intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon, but it does not justify disarming a sober citizen based exclusively on his past drug usage.”