Jersey City’s Off-Duty Marijuana Use Lawsuit Is a ‘Waste of Taxpayer Money’

The New Jersey Fraternal Order of Police is cracking down on a newly filed lawsuit by Jersey City officers that seeks to reverse a state rule that generally allows police officers to use marijuana while off-duty, calling the legal challenge a “a regrettable waste of taxpayers’ money.” ”

Jersey City and its public safety director, James Shea, sued the state in federal court on Monday, arguing that the policy released in February by the state’s attorney general’s office was preempted by federal law.

The lawsuit, the fraternal organization said in a news release, risks undermining otherwise clear guidance from state officials.

“New Jersey state law and guidance from the Office of the Attorney General clearly provide that police officers may consume cannabis while off-duty, but are prohibited from being under the influence of cannabis while carrying out their duties,” it says. “The members of the New Jersey State Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police abide by the law and will continue to do so. Jersey City’s attempt to distort these clear guidelines through frivolous litigation is a regrettable waste of taxpayer dollars.”

The Jersey City lawsuit cites a federal law that prohibits people who use marijuana from purchasing firearms or ammunition. It argues that under state policy, city officials would be forced to violate federal law “because they would at least be required to provide ammunition to officers who they know are using cannabis.”

The lawsuit also states that police officers who use cannabis commit crimes themselves because they are “required to possess and maintain a firearm and ammunition to be police officers.” [sic].”

However, a simple reading of federal firearms policy suggests that a different standard applies to the distribution of firearms by government agencies.

Here are the federal guidelines for people seeking to purchase or possess firearms regarding marijuana:

“It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of a firearm or ammunition to any person who knows or has reasonable grounds to believe that such person…is an illegal user of, or addicted to, a controlled substance…”

“It shall be unlawful for any person who illegally uses or is addicted to a controlled substance to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or to possess in commerce or interfere with, firearms or ammunition. or to receive firearms or ammunition shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.”

And here is the relevant exception that might apply to local law enforcement officers:

“The provisions of this chapter, except sections 922(d)(9) and 922(g)(9) and the provisions relating to firearms subject to the prohibitions of section 922(p), do not apply to the transportation, Shipment, receipt, possession or importation of firearms or ammunition imported into, sold or shipped to, or issued for use in, the United States or any department or agency thereof, or any State or department, agency or political subdivision thereof .”

Jersey City police have fired several officers for testing positive for THC metabolites and have taken a strong stance against state policies allowing off-duty cannabis use. But two administrative judges have ruled against the city, most recently in August, and ordered the reinstatement of two fired police officers with back pay.

Gina Coleman/Weedmaps

As Jersey City officials emphasized at a news conference Tuesday, there is no test that can reliably show whether an officer is impaired by cannabis on the job. Allowing police officers to use marijuana jeopardizes public safety and exposes the city to legal liability, officials said.

Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop (D), who is running for governor, said on social media that there is “no way to confirm whether cannabis is consumed an hour, a day or a week before a shift became”.

He added that the city’s lawsuit invokes “the same federal law under which Hunter Biden was charged regarding firearms,” ​​referring to President Joe Biden’s son, who faces federal charges for allegedly possesses a weapon and consumes cocaine at the same time.

The issue of gun ownership and marijuana use has preoccupied federal courts in recent years, although the rulings have reached different conclusions.

Earlier this month, a federal appeals panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit heard oral arguments in a case involving gun possession by medical marijuana patients. In this matter, the plaintiffs are appealing a lower court judge’s decision upholding the federal ban.

However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in August that the federal ban on firearms for cannabis users was unconstitutional. A disagreement between the two district courts could result in the U.S. Supreme Court taking up the matter.

The Justice Department has told the Eleventh Circuit that it believes the Fifth Circuit’s ruling was “wrongly decided” and stated at the hearing that “there are some reasons to be uncertain about the basis of this decision.” be”.

Some district courts have also ruled against the federal ban.

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma ruled in February that the ban on people who use marijuana from owning firearms was unconstitutional. The judge said the federal government’s justification for upholding the law was “concerning.”

In the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, a judge ruled in April that it was unconstitutional to ban people who use marijuana from owning firearms – and that the same legal principle applies to the sale and transfer of guns.

Shortly before the hearing in the Eleventh Circuit, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) reportedly sent a letter to Arkansas officials stating that the state’s recently enacted law allowing medical cannabis patients allows people to obtain firearms licenses for concealed carrying weapons “represents an unacceptable risk. ” and could jeopardize the state’s state-approved alternative gun licensing policy.

After Minnesota’s governor signed a legalization bill in May, the agency reminded people who use cannabis would be prohibited from owning or purchasing guns and ammunition “until the end of federal prohibition.”

In 2020, the ATF issued an advisory specifically aimed at Michigan requiring gun sellers to conduct federal background checks on all unlicensed gun buyers, saying the state’s cannabis laws have made “habitual marijuana users” and other disqualified people illegally purchasing of firearms made possible.

Meanwhile, lawyers for Hunter Biden — who was charged with purchasing a gun in 2018 when he disclosed that he was actively using crack cocaine — previously cited the court’s ruling on the unconstitutionality of the federal ban. on the grounds that this also applies to her client’s case.

Republican members of Congress have filed two bills so far this session that focus on gun and marijuana policy.

Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), co-chair of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, filed legislation in May to protect the Second Amendment rights of people who use marijuana in legal states, allowing them to purchase and possess marijuana of firearms they currently possess are prohibited by federal law.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has committed to linking this legislation to a bipartisan marijuana banking bill that passed out of committee last month and is still pending floor approval.

Meanwhile, Mast is also supporting a separate bill this session from Rep. Alex Mooney (R-WV) that would more narrowly allow medical cannabis patients to purchase and possess firearms.

This article originally appeared on Marijuana Moment.