So I've been predicting that the Trump administration would crack down on legalized marijuana, and when I said that on NPR I was accused of being a fear-mongerer. Wednesday I spoke to a group of law students about legalized marijuana and how it affects employment law, and the first thing I said is that lawyers should beware representing marijuana dispensaries because a crackdown was coming from the feds.
Alarmist? Maybe not. Because yesterday the White House announced a crackdown on marijuana use. I'm rarely proven right this quickly, so thanks? Our new Attorney General has made it clear that he is very, very anti-marijuana. What does this mean for states with legalized marijuana and legalized medical marijuana?
The announcement seemed to indicate that the first crackdown would be in states with legalized marijuana for recreational use. That means you can expect the jackbooted thugs to start raiding marijuana dispensaries in those states, getting lists of customers, and then arresting those customers. I have been predicting that anyone involved in the marijuana industry will start being charged with conspiracy, and that includes lawyers.
Once they bust the recreational users, it's just a matter of time before they go after those medical marijuana cardholders. If you have a disability and are using prescribed marijuana to give you relief from your horrific symptoms, beware. Once they start busting recreational users, I suggest finding alternatives and not getting caught holding the bag (see how I did that?) with even prescribed marijuana.
As for lawyers advising the industry, you are not only risking your license but your freedom. I recommend caution all around.
Not only does the administration have an incentive to bust pot smokers to bolster the private prison industry (read: indentured servitude for big corporations), but getting busted can mean forfeiture of your property with very little right to due process, so when the administration bankrupts the country (yes, I said it, and you can bank on it the way we are headed) they will be desperate for funds to bolster the failing economy.
There are very few protections already for employees who use medical marijuana legally. Now there is even more reason to be cautious before filling that prescription.
What You Need To Know Before You Scream “I Quit,” Get Fired, Or Decide to Sue the Bastards
Have a general question about employment law? Want to share a story? I welcome all comments and questions. I can't give legal advice here about specific situations but will be glad to discuss general issues and try to point you in the right direction. If you need legal advice, contact an employment lawyer in your state. Remember, anything you post here will be seen publicly, and I will comment publicly on it. It will not be confidential. Govern yourself accordingly. If you want to communicate with me confidentially as Donna Ballman, Florida lawyer rather than as Donna Ballman, blogger, my firm's website is here.
Friday, February 24, 2017
Disabled Employees and Lawyers: Beware Legal Marijuana Laws
Friday, February 10, 2017
What A Broad Religious Exemption To Discrimination Laws Will Mean
While the Trump Administration announced that it would keep in place President Obama's Executive Order protecting employees of federal contractors from LGBT discrimination, there have been reports of another proposed executive order that would provide a religious exemption from all discrimination laws.
If signed this Executive Order could conceivably be used to argue exemptions to race and sex discrimination laws as well as LGBT discrimination. While I don't think the President (who is not king or dictator, yet) can change existing laws with the stroke of a pen, this could result in years of litigation on these issues.
There are certainly many (if not most) religions that consider women to be second-class citizens. Some religions believe women should be subordinate to men, should not work outside the home, and/or should cover themselves from head to toe. Will the Administration be so intent on allowing LGBT discrimination that they forget about women's rights?
Indeed, the Bible was used for years to argue in favor of race discrimination and slavery. Such a broad exemption could be used to justify race discrimination by certain religious groups.
On the other hand, it would be conceivable that someone (maybe John Oliver, Trevor Noah or Samantha Bee) could form a religion to counter all this nonsense. A religion that says it is sinful to discriminate against LGBT, Muslim and other oppressed communities; that it is sinful to participate in oppressing the poor; that it is sinful to participate in increasing wage disparities; that it is sinful to deny excellent education to the poor and middle class; that it is sinful to employ people who would participate in such activities. Some religions already hold similar beliefs.
What would be the effect of such a religion? State and federal employees who were members could use a religious justification to refuse to enforce or participate in enforcement of any laws or policies that are against their religious beliefs. Closely-held for-profit corporations could refuse to employ anyone who held homophobic views, voted for Trump or walk around with Ayn Rand books. I'm betting that those who want to use their religion to discriminate would be the first to howl at such practices.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. A broad religious exemption to discrimination laws might not have the effect Mr. Trump and his cronies are looking for. Be careful what you wish for.
The four-page draft order, a copy of which is currently circulating among federal staff and advocacy organizations, construes religious organizations so broadly that it covers “any organization, including closely held for-profit corporations,” and protects “religious freedom” in every walk of life: “when providing social services, education, or healthcare; earning a living, seeking a job, or employing others; receiving government grants or contracts; or otherwise participating in the marketplace, the public square, or interfacing with Federal, State or local governments.”
If signed this Executive Order could conceivably be used to argue exemptions to race and sex discrimination laws as well as LGBT discrimination. While I don't think the President (who is not king or dictator, yet) can change existing laws with the stroke of a pen, this could result in years of litigation on these issues.
There are certainly many (if not most) religions that consider women to be second-class citizens. Some religions believe women should be subordinate to men, should not work outside the home, and/or should cover themselves from head to toe. Will the Administration be so intent on allowing LGBT discrimination that they forget about women's rights?
Indeed, the Bible was used for years to argue in favor of race discrimination and slavery. Such a broad exemption could be used to justify race discrimination by certain religious groups.
On the other hand, it would be conceivable that someone (maybe John Oliver, Trevor Noah or Samantha Bee) could form a religion to counter all this nonsense. A religion that says it is sinful to discriminate against LGBT, Muslim and other oppressed communities; that it is sinful to participate in oppressing the poor; that it is sinful to participate in increasing wage disparities; that it is sinful to deny excellent education to the poor and middle class; that it is sinful to employ people who would participate in such activities. Some religions already hold similar beliefs.
What would be the effect of such a religion? State and federal employees who were members could use a religious justification to refuse to enforce or participate in enforcement of any laws or policies that are against their religious beliefs. Closely-held for-profit corporations could refuse to employ anyone who held homophobic views, voted for Trump or walk around with Ayn Rand books. I'm betting that those who want to use their religion to discriminate would be the first to howl at such practices.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. A broad religious exemption to discrimination laws might not have the effect Mr. Trump and his cronies are looking for. Be careful what you wish for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)