On September 18, 2022, Governor Newsom signed and approved Assembly Bill 2188 (“AB 2188”), which amends the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) to generally prohibit an employer from discriminating against an employee or employment applicant for cannabis use off the job and away from work, which is a significant change to the
Employers May Soon Be Required to Accommodate Employee Use of Medical Marijuana
This post was authored by Megan Lewis.
Since recreational marijuana was legalized in 2016, many have assumed that employment protections for marijuana users would likely expand, either via legislation or though litigation.
We are already seeing small steps in that direction. For instance, San Francisco recently amended its ban-the-box ordinance to, among other things,
Navigating the Hazy World of Recreational Marijuana Use Following Proposition 64’s Passage
Last year, California voters passed Proposition 64 (“Prop 64”), making the recreational use and sale of marijuana generally permissible under California law. Specifically, Prop 64 legalizes the use of marijuana for non-medical reasons by adults age 21 and over. While Prop 64 made the use of recreational marijuana legal under state law as of
Can California Employers Require Employees To Pass On Marijuana Even If It’s Legalized On Election Day?
This post was authored by Megan Lewis.
Twenty years ago, California became the first state to legalize medical marijuana. Since then, numerous other states have legalized marijuana for medicinal use. What about more general legalization? Though a previous attempt in 2010 failed, a recent poll indicates that California is in fact poised to join
Up in Smoke: Is Ross v. RagingWire Telecommunications, Inc. Still Relevant to Employers?
In the 2008 case Ross v. RagingWire Telecommunications, Inc., the California Supreme Court held that employers are not required to accommodate an employee’s medicinal marijuana use irrespective of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 [Health & Safety Code section 11362.5], which provides that persons using marijuana under the care of a physician are not