Photo of Jennifer L. Mora

Jennifer Mora is the assistant editor for The Blunt Truth®, as well as a Labor & Employment senior counsel in the Los Angeles office and key member of Seyfarth’s Workplace Compliance Solutions group.

In late May 2026, the Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance and the Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) issued a new Question and Answer (Q&A) addressing how its drug testing regulations apply considering the recent rescheduling of certain marijuana products under federal law. The Q&A provides important clarification for employers with safety-sensitive employees subject to DOT regulations—and reinforces that, despite shifting federal policy, DOT drug testing requirements remain unchanged in key respects.

Continue Reading Legal Update: No Safe Harbor: DOT Rejects State-Licensed Marijuana as Basis to Overturn Positive Drug Test Results

On April 22, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a final order reclassifying certain marijuana-related products under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). The order places (1) FDA-approved marijuana-derived drug products and (2) marijuana produced and dispensed pursuant to state medical marijuana licensing programs into Schedule III.

At the same time, the DOJ directed the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to conduct a formal administrative hearing, beginning June 29, 2026, to consider whether marijuana more broadly should be rescheduled.

Although this development reflects a meaningful shift in federal policy, it does not legalize marijuana at the federal level. Instead, it introduces a more complex regulatory environment with important—and evolving—implications for employers.

Continue Reading Legal Update: A Dual Framework Emerges: Marijuana’s Schedule III Reclassification and the Road Ahead for Employers

President Trump’s December 2025 Executive Order signals a possible shift in federal marijuana policy, but many employers still have a lawful and legitimate basis to prohibit impairment at work. Employers that test for marijuana should continue to monitor legal developments and evolving legal risk. Moreover, because employees may not fully understand the implications of the Executive Order, employers should remind employees of their policy expectations.

Continue Reading Marijuana Rescheduling: Should Employers Update Their Drug Testing Policies and Practices?

Since our 2024 update on California’s Labor Peace Agreement (“LPA”) requirement, the landscape for licensees in recreational cannabis states such as California and New York has remained murky. Although the evidence around compliance and enforcement of these rules has been scant, that has not prevented licensees from continuing to lodge legal challenges to these mandates. Some of these challenges have been rejected, some have succeeded based on preemption theories under the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) and violations of the First Amendment, and some remain undecided.

Continue Reading Update on LPA Requirements for Licensure in Legal Cannabis States

A recent opinion from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania serves a win to a medical marijuana card-holder who brought claims against an employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the Pennsylvania Medical Marijuana Act (“MMA”), and Pennsylvania common law.  The decision reflects careful fact pleading by the plaintiff.  It also highlights a number of important themes for Pennsylvania employers, including the importance of evaluating job duties and having legitimate reasons for policies prohibiting off-duty marijuana use.  In jurisdictions with employment protections for medical marijuana users, the decision also underscores the care employers should take if an employee or applicant discloses that they are a lawful medical marijuana user.

Continue Reading Pennsylvania Medical Marijuana Card-Holder Survives Employer’s Motion to Dismiss

On October 29, 2024, the Second District Court of Appeals of California decided against the County of Santa Barbara (“the county”) in JCCRandall LLC v. County of Santa Barbara. The Court held, contrary to popular belief, that marijuana is still illegal in California because it is illegal federally. Thus, the Court sided with a private landowner (“plaintiff”) who objected to the county issuing a conditional use permit (“CUP”) for the cultivation of cannabis on the plaintiff’s land without their consent, despite a pre-existing easement.

Continue Reading Cultivator Not Entitled to Use Easement for Cannabis Purposes Absent Landowner Consent

It is not often that the government has the opportunity to regulate and oversee an entirely brand new market; and, in the case of California, when it legalized recreational cannabis for adult-use, it decided to mandate involvement of labor unions in the state’s emerging cannabis industry, through implementation of a Labor Peace Agreement (“LPA”) requirement. Because this fundamental choice by the state has posed headaches and dilemmas for licensees, cannabis business operators in California should ensure they receive counsel from reputable management-side labor attorneys before entering into any LPAs with unions. Amidst this haze and confusion, we offer some context and observations from a labor and management relations perspective.

Of note, despite going into effect over a month ago, only a tiny percentage of licensees and operators are complying with the mandate. Moreover, whether intentional or not, California’s LPA mandate has caused a union turf war, where bigger established unions have been looking to muscle out their smaller competitors for the dues of the thousands of workers in California’s burgeoning canna-industry. Critically, however, the legality of the LPA mandate is still being determined by the courts, where serious Constitutional questions abound, and because other states have been considering similar mandates, observers will continue monitoring what happens in California on this issue.

Continue Reading Purple Haze: LPA Mandate Poised to Continue Causing Confusion and Chaos for California Cannabis Licensees

Since 2014, Minnesota has provided applicants and employees with protections if they lawfully use cannabis for medicinal purposes. Starting August 1, 2023, Minnesota will provide protections to individuals who use cannabis for recreational purposes, after Minnesota Governor Tim Walz signed a state law allowing adults 21 and older to use recreational cannabis. The new law amends the state’s Consumable Products Act to protect off-duty cannabis use. The law also amends Minnesota’s Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (DATWA) by excluding cannabis from the definition of “drug” and by creating two different workplace drug testing schemes based on whether positions are exempt from the cannabis testing prohibitions. 

Continue Reading Minnesota’s New Recreational Cannabis Law Results in First-Of-Its-Kind Drug Testing Scheme

On May 25, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey granted an employer’s motion to dismiss a putative class action in Zanetich v. Wal-Mart Stores E., Inc.  Addressing an issue of first impression, the Court held that job applicants do not have a private right of action under the New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Marketplace Modernization Act (the “CREAMMA”), the state’s recreational marijuana law.  The Court also held that there is no common law claim for wrongful failure to hire in violation of public policy in New Jersey. 

Continue Reading Failure to Hire Claims Go Up In Smoke for Pot-Using New Jersey Job Applicant

On September 18, 2022, California amended its primary employment discrimination law to specifically regulate the drug testing methodologies that employers may use when making hiring, termination, and other employment decisions relating to cannabis users. More recently, on May 9, 2023, Washington Governor Jay Inslee signed similar legislation relating to initial hiring decisions. Both laws, which will be effective January 1, 2024, are the first of their kind because they require employers to have a basic understanding of a somewhat complicated issue – the science behind cannabis testing.

Continue Reading Clearing the Haze: The Method and the Madness Behind the New Cannabis Laws in California and Washington