Dale Schafer Law News – 9/30/22

Courtesy of San Luis Obispo County

#californiacannabis – SLO County – “On September 13th, the Board of Supervisors approved changes to the County’s cannabis program, including approving a new required fee for licensed cannabis businesses operating in the unincorporated areas of the County. The new fee will take effect on October 14, 2022.

Every County cannabis business license will be required to pay a Cannabis Tax Compliance fee of $3,918 at the time of license issuance and each year at the time of license renewal. This fee is in addition to the required annual business license fee, which is currently $44 per new license and $34 per license renewal.

The Board also eliminated the previous California Cannabis Authority (CCA) fee. Cost recovery for the CCA is now included in the new Compliance fee. In addition to the CCA, the fee will fund a field audit program for cannabis businesses. This change in required fees is part of the Board’s direction to County departments that all costs of operating the cannabis program be recovered so that the cannabis program is not subsidized by the County General Fund and taxpayers.”

https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Auditor-Controller-Treasurer-Tax-Collector-Public-/News/Board-of-Supervisors-Approves-New-Cannabis-Tax-Com.aspx

This sheriff is ridiculous!

#californiacannabis – “The El Dorado County Sheriff’s Office is publicly against any cannabis grow in the county, citing odor, setback, signage and security as issues.

Its recommendations included having hemp cultivation sites more than 1,500 feet from most public businesses, a robust security plan and residential setbacks of 800 feet minimum.

“It is our professional opinion that the pilot program will only allow for the cultivation of industrial hemp in select areas that are rural and have minimal impact on schools, public right of ways and neighboring parcels,” states a letter from the Sheriff’s Office to the Board of Supervisors. “As a result, the proposed pilot program will not adequately reflect the high risk of harmful and negative community impacts associated with loosely regulated industrial hemp cultivation.”

https://www.gtgazette.com/2022/09/29/hemp-program-could-take-seed-in-2023/

Dale Schafer Law News – 9/29/22

#californiacannabis – “The California Assembly’s Committee on Insurance explained the intent behind AB 2568 in a report issued earlier this year:

“The hesitancy of insurance providers to provide insurance for commercial cannabis is attributed to risk, since cannabis is classified as a Schedule I substance under the Federal Controlled Substances Act. Therefore, much of the insurance available in California is from surplus lines. This does not align with the federal government’s longstanding determination that it is in the public’s interest for states to regulate their own insurance marketplaces. Further, the argument has been refuted in federal case law brought about in Green Earth Wellness Center v. Attain Specialty Insurance Company (2016), which established that federal classification of cannabis is not relevant in an insurance provider’s determination to write an insurance policy.

It is important that commercial cannabis businesses have multiple options for insurance as they pursue licensure. AB 2568 clarifies that writing insurance for commercial cannabis does not constitute a crime, since cannabis is part of a legal, regulated market in California. This clarity will provide assurances to admitted insurers that they will not be in violation of any regulations and encourage them to provide an insurance product.””

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/california-enacts-legal-protections-cannabis-insurance-providers

#cannabislaw – “A California federal judge has thrown out claims against the California Highway Patrol and the cities of Napa, St. Helena and Calistoga by a pair of cannabis growers alleging that police wrongly confiscated or destroyed more than 2,500 plants, saying the growers failed to meet notice requirements.

In an order filed Monday, U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granted dismissal bids by the cities and the CHP in a suit filed pro se by James Hopkins and Kochagorn Sinsukthaworn, who run Infinity Cannabis Growth….

Judge Corley dismissed the state law claims, saying that under the California Government Claims Act, a plaintiff can sue a public entity for money or damages only after presenting a claim to that entity and that entity has either acted on or rejected the claim.

According to Judge Corley’s order, there’s nothing in the complaint indicating that the plaintiffs filed such a claim with CHP, the state of California or the three cities named in the complaint. However, she gave leave to amend, saying the claims could survive if Hopkins and Sinsukthaworn plead that they did submit such a claim.

Judge Corley dismissed the federal claims against CHP with prejudice, saying the CHP is not considered a “person” that can be sued under federal law for the deprivation of constitutional rights.”

https://www.law360.com/articles/1534182/3-calif-cities-and-chp-avoid-suit-over-destroyed-pot-plants

Courtesy of Waste Today

#californiacannabis – “California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed into law A.B. 1894, which would prohibit the marketing of cannabis vaping devices as disposable or imply they may be thrown in the trash.

“We can no longer ignore the harmful impacts that electronics and batteries in cannabis vapes [have] on our environment and [the] waste industry,” says Assemblywoman Luz Rivas, a sponsor of the bill. “A.B. 1894 takes an important step forward in prohibiting the advertisement and marketing of cannabis vaporizers devices that are ‘disposable’ or may be thrown in the trash or recycled.””

https://www.wastetodaymagazine.com/article/california-passes-legislation-to-ensure-proper-disposal-of-cannabis-vaping-devices/

Courtesy of the Santa Barbara News Press


#californiacannabis – ““All we’ve heard for two years is: ‘You need concrete evidence.’ So we went out and got some,”  Blair Pence, president of the Santa Barbara Coalition for Responsible Cannabis, told the News-Press Tuesday. “Honestly, the scope of these results came as a surprise to me. I can’t believe this has gone on in our valley, and I am hopeful that the authorities will put a stop to it immediately…..

According to the investigation, more than 500 acre-feet of water per year are being diverted from the Santa Ynez River Alluvial Basin to cannabis grows. The investigation by Lynker and the law office says this usage violates California law, which prohibits use of surface water for cannabis cultivation between March 31 and Nov. 1.

Of the 31 cannabis cultivation operations along the Santa Ynez River between Lake Cachuma and Lompoc, 22 appear to pump and irrigate illegally using water that is protected under California law, according to the investigation.”

https://newspress.com/investigators-say-more-than-70-of-cannabis-growers-use-illegal-water/

Dale Schafer Law News – 9/28/22

#cbdproducts – “Two Republican members of Congress want answers from the feds about regulations for CBD and other hemp-derived products.

U.S. Reps. Morgan Griffith of Virginia and Brett Guthrie of Kentucky co-signed two letters to U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Robert Califf in which they question several FDA regulatory practices and also demand action.

“In areas from baby formula to CBD products to tobacco, the FDA has been sluggish in solving problems, it has been unresponsive to Congress, and it has been deficient in the execution of responsibilities given to it by law,” Griffith said in a statement.

“We ultimately want to ensure this federal agency takes more decisive action when issues are reported and meets its responsibility of making sure products are safe for consumption,” Guthrie said in a news release.”

https://mjbizdaily.com/two-congress-members-criticize-fda-for-lack-of-cbd-oversight/

Courtesy of the Legislative Analyst Office

#californiacannabis – “Department of Cannabis Control (DCC). The budget provides DCC with $201.6 million, primarily from the Cannabis Control Fund, which is supported largely by licensing fees. This is a net decrease of $92.1 million (31 percent) from the revised 2021-22 level. This decrease is primarily due to the expiration of one-time General Fund support provided in 2021-22 related to assisting individuals in participating in the cannabis market. This decrease is partially offset by various augmentations, including the following:

$20.5 million one time from the General Fund in 2022-23 for the Cannabis Local Jurisdiction Retail Access Grant Program to provide funding to cities and counties that do not currently have a local cannabis retailer licensing program, in order to aid them in developing such programs.

$13.6 million one time from the Cannabis Tax Fund in 2022-23 for an IT assessment of a unified cannabis licensing system, consumer awareness campaign, and data collection and sharing efforts.”

https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4626

Courtesy of Canna Law Blog

#californiacannabis – “Senate Bill 1186, alongside other technical fixes to the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act, creates the Medicinal Cannabis Patients’ Right of Access Act (“Act”). Its main function is that, as of January 1, 2024, no local jurisdiction can

adopt or enforce any regulation that prohibits the retail sale by delivery within the local jurisdiction of medicinal cannabis to medicinal cannabis patients or their primary caregivers, or that otherwise has the effect of prohibiting the retail sale by delivery within the local jurisdiction of medicinal cannabis to medicinal cannabis patients or their primary caregivers by licensed medicinal cannabis businesses in a timely and readily accessible manner, and in types and quantities that are sufficient to meet demand from medicinal cannabis patients within the local jurisdiction…..

The Act also intelligently prohibits local government’s use of de facto bans on medical cannabis delivery via severe restrictions on:

The number of medicinal cannabis businesses authorized to deliver medicinal cannabis in the local jurisdiction.

The operating hours of medicinal cannabis businesses.

The number or frequency of sales by delivery of medicinal cannabis.

The types or quantities of medicinal cannabis authorized to be sold by delivery.

The establishment of physical premises from which retail sale by delivery of medicinal cannabis within the jurisdiction is conducted by a licensed non-storefront retailer (except that this prohibition doesn’t require the establishment of additional physical premises in a local jurisdiction that allowed medicinal cannabis retail as of January 1, 2022, and in which at least one physical premises engaged in the retail sale of medicinal cannabis, whether storefront or delivery, is already established).”

https://harrisbricken.com/cannalawblog/california-expands-medical-cannabis-delivery/

Dale Schafer Law News – 9/27/22

#hemp – “An Oregon State University study has found spent hemp biomass left over from CBD extraction – usually just treated as waste or plowed back into fields – is looking to be a good feed alternative for lambs.

Believed to be the first study evaluating the effects of feeding spent hemp biomass to livestock, the research involved feeding lambs different amounts of spent hemp biomass (10% and 20% of total feed). Then the hemp biomass was withheld for four weeks and the lambs assessed for carcass characteristics, meat quality and health parameters.

The researchers found the  nutritional quality of spent hemp biomass on par with alfalfa. Among other findings were feed intake being negatively affected by feeding 20% spent hemp biomass – but only in the short term. At the lower level of  10%, feed intake increased long-term but there were no effects on lamb weight.

The OSU researchers note while the livers of the animals were not affected, a decrease in the ability of the liver to extract or metabolize a drug was observed, which will require more research.”

https://hempgazette.com/news/hemp-livestock-feed-hg1791/

#cannabispolitics – “In all five states where voters will decide marijuana measures this year, explicit recreational use is on the ballot. A similar measure was postponed in Oklahoma after the state government dragged its feet in verifying signatures, while a medical-use measure failed to make the ballot in Nebraska. Prospects are good for several of the measures going before voters: the Arkansas proposal enjoys 58 percent support, the Maryland measure has 59 percent support, and the Missouri proposal has 62 percent support. There’s apparently been no polling on the matter in North Dakota, while a July poll in South Dakota had the measure underwater with voters.”

https://reason.com/2022/09/26/more-states-poised-to-ease-marijuana-laws-after-election-day/

#californiacannabis – “A cannabis company accusing a banking firm of failing to pay millions in state taxes on its behalf asked a California federal judge for sanctions and a default judgment, saying the CEO lied during a deposition and submitted falsified documents.

Pacific Banking Corp. CEO Justin Costello gave evasive testimony, flouted four court discovery orders, pretended he didn’t remember key transactions in the case, and submitted a doctored financial statement to the court, Cann Distributors Inc. told the court Friday in its request for sanctions….

Cann, which makes cannabis-infused sodas, sued Pacific in March 2020, accusing it of failing to make more than $2 million in tax payments to the state of California on its behalf, as well as failing to pay vendor invoices. A month later, the company secured an order blocking Pacific from touching the roughly $2.8 million Cann said it had deposited with the marijuana-friendly financial institution, a middleman between cannabis companies and traditional banks. The unpaid taxes have racked up $2 million in state penalties, Cann said in its Friday filing.”

https://www.law360.com/california/articles/1533692/cannabis-co-seeks-default-win-against-bank-firm-in-tax-suit?nl_pk=87a814fe-acbd-41b5-9dff-8f51227935f5&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=california&utm_content=2022-09-27

Dale Schafer Law News – 9/26/23

#psilocybin – “Psychedelics such as psilocybin “truly have the potential to revolutionize how we treat several neuropsychiatric diseases, including headaches,” said one neuropharmacologist at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.  Due to the fact that headaches can affect a variety of people, and can range from mild to extremely incapacitating, research is currently ongoing for four different headache types, with psilocybin being the current emphasis.”

https://www.benzinga.com/markets/cannabis/22/08/28692963/ps-science-feature-psilocybin-for-headaches

Courtesy of CannaLaw Blog

#cannabisindustry – “When reasonable minds prevail, an effective mediator (who is often a seasoned attorney or even a retired judge) can work with the parties to see the strengths and weaknesses of their cases, the cost vs. benefit analysis of filing or continuing a lawsuit, and what settlement options are available. Importantly, a mediator can NOT make the parties settle – it is truly up to the parties to put their best foots forward and participate in their mediation in good faith.”

https://harrisbricken.com/cannalawblog/cannabis-litigation-mediation-tips/

Dale Schafer Law News – 9/23/22

#californiacannabis – “The Los Angeles Times has released a heavily researched, heavily reported investigation on the many, many ways that California’s legalization of marijuana has been a disastrous mess.

Titled “Legal Weed, Broken Promises,” the four stories of the series painstakingly illustrate the breadth of the illegal grow operations scattered across much of the rural parts of California, the political corruption and bribery that has come from the way the state has given politicians control over licensing, and the spread of unlicensed dispensaries that are seemingly uncontainable….

But the series is not without its flaws, the biggest of which is a relatively poor grasp of markets and the limits of the power of government to control how people interact with them, which is particularly true in a state as massive as California. There is the assumption in these stories that the breakdown in the system is due to a lack of control and enforcement by police and regulators. The stories are reluctant to address the real sources: The extent of state and local taxes drive up prices, and the ability of local officials to decide who can participate in cannabis is a huge factor in the persistence of the black market. While the stories do bring up these issues to provide some context, they really don’t contend with how much of the California black market is a result of the exorbitant costs to do business legally in the state.”

https://reason.com/2022/09/22/l-a-times-investigates-californias-marijuana-legalization-disaster/

#californiacannabis – “The bill’s text, however, prohibits the state from entering into any such agreements until “among other things, federal law is amended to allow for, or the United States Department of Justice issues an opinion or memorandum allowing or tolerating, interstate transfer of cannabis or cannabis products between authorized commercial cannabis businesses.” [2]. This is notable because similar other bills in California (see, SHIP Act) and other states (see, Oregon Senate Bill 582) make these permissions contingent upon the amendment of federal law. California’s SB 1326, on the other hand, seems to suggest that even a DOJ memorandum – think: the Cole Memo of 2013 – which “tolerates” interstate transfer of cannabis would be sufficient for California operators to begin exporting their products across state lines under the proposed law.”

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/crossing-the-line-california-looks-to-1461988/

Courtesy of Lexology

#californiacannabis – “The regulations cover both environmental exposures and consumer product exposures.

This means that cannabis lounges or any designated cannabis smoking areas may require specialized environmental exposure warnings.

The regulations set forth tailored consumer product warnings for inhalation of marijuana smoke or products with THC intended to be smoked, but also a series of separate tailored warnings for THC that is (1) ingested; (2) vaped or dabbed; and (3) dermally applied.

Therefore, it will be important to determine use / route of exposure of the product before determining which label may apply. Currently, there is no guidance from OEHHA on labeling these particular products that may have multiple uses (e.g., ones that may be ingested and dermally applied), so it will be critical to assess the business and legal risks of choosing a particular label, along with considering what might be the primary use of the product.

A cannabis product that provided a general safe harbor warning and was manufactured prior to October 1, 2023 will be deemed clear and reasonable regardless of when the product is sold to a consumer.

While it will of course be important for manufacturers to maintain the manufacture date information, it will also likely be important that this information is shared throughout the supply chain to distributors, retailers, etc. in the event a lawsuit for failure to warn is brought by a Prop 65 plaintiff.”

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5be4e7fc-75cc-4377-bb8e-e2d85ceb6a11

#californiacannabis – “California’s cannabis regulator asked a state judge on Wednesday to grant a summary judgment award of $128 million in penalties from a group of unlicensed pot product makers who had effectively admitted to the unlawful activity in court.

The Department of Cannabis Control said undisputed evidence turned up in the course of the litigation left no question that four business entities and three individual owners named as defendants had been making and selling unlicensed cannabis products for approximately one and a half years….

The public agencies alleged in a September 2020 complaint that the entities created more than 3.3 million pounds of Kushy Push-brand marijuana gummies in an unlicensed factory.

According to court documents, investigators raided the factory in October 2019 and found cannabis concentrate, gummies, vapes and equipment for infusing products with cannabis, as well as records indicating that manufacture had been occurring for approximately 18 months….

The state is seeking total penalties of $128,061,000 — calculated as a trebled $81,000 license fee further multiplied by 527, once for each day of violation.”

https://www.law360.com/california/articles/1533098/calif-regulators-seek-128m-in-penalties-from-illegal-pot-biz?nl_pk=87a814fe-acbd-41b5-9dff-8f51227935f5&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=california&utm_content=2022-09-23

Dale Schafer Law News – 9/22/22

#californiacannabis – “New legislation in California gives off-duty cannabis users the right to fight discrimination in the workplace and prohibits California employers from firing workers or refusing to hire applicants solely due to a positive cannabis test. You can read more about the new law in our Insight here. However, federal contractors should note that the new legislation does not preempt state or federal laws requiring employees to be tested for controlled substances or directing employers to maintain a drug-free workplace, such as those required for receiving federal funds, licensing, or federal contracts….

As we know, federal law preempts state law, but where there are no conflicts, the state law will govern. For example, some federal laws require testing for cannabis use, including Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations for pilots, truck drivers, and other safety‐sensitive transportation employees. To the extent the testing is required by the terms of a federal contract, the new California legislation would be in conflict, and those specific provisions of the state law would be unenforceable.”

https://www.fisherphillips.com/news-insights/what-federal-contractors-need-to-know-about-california-workers-new-cannabis-protections.html

#cannabisindustry – “As leaders in this industry, we need to encourage states and local governments to establish regulations and consult real experts who have been in the trenches throughout the years. We should avoid an industry dominated by those who don’t understand how the industry itself works. The cannabis industry, with the interplay between federal, state and local laws, is not like any other business. It is extremely difficult to survive, let alone thrive.”

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture-council/articles/helping-small-businesses-survive-and-thrive-the-burgeoning-legal-cannabis-industry-1361866/

#cannabislaw – Trademarks – “When the USPTO examines a use-based trademark application, the examining attorneys will scrutinize the identification and specimens of use to see if they indicate that the identified goods or services are illegal under federal law. If the specimens of use indicate that the goods or services involve cannabis related activities, then registration will be refused.

Similarly, if the USPTO examines an Intent-to-Use trademark application, the examining attorneys will scrutinize the identification to see whether it indicates that the identified goods or services are illegal under federal law. If there is any question about whether the goods or services involve cannabis related activities, the examining attorneys will make inquiries to the applicant. If the examining attorneys determine that the identified goods or services violate the CSA or the FDCA, then registration will be refused – even if use of the mark was only intended. See In re JJ206, LLC, dba JuJu Joints, 120 USPQ2d 1568 (TTAB 2016).

This has led to some creativity.

In attempts to avoid such refusals, some applicants that are seeking to register trademarks related to cannabis related goods or services have submitted identifications in Intent-to-Use applications with qualifying language, such as, “…all goods compliant with federal law” or “…all the foregoing not including any goods noncompliant with U.S. federal law.”  This creative strategy is designed to avoid any need to disclose specimens of use to the examining attorneys, and to rely on an intention to only use the trademark in connection with legal goods or services. Insofar as specimens in Intent-to-Use applications need not be submitted for several years after a notice of allowance, these applicants are hoping that bills like the MORE Act or SAFE Banking Act will become law, thereby making the existing cannabis-related refusals to register obsolete.”

https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2022/09/20/latest-developments-us-trademark-registrations-cannabis-products/id=151465/

#hempindustry – “El Dorado County leaders are making another attempt to incorporate legal cultivation of hemp through a pilot program meant to test the feasibility of the crop in the county.

The program, discussed during the Board of Supervisors’ Sept. 13 meeting, would consist of at most five hemp producers for the 2023 and 2024 growing seasons with a series of contingencies.

Those include a 200-foot setback in residential areas, adequate signage at the perimeter of grow sites, following California’s policies on THC testing and notifying schools located within 300 feet of a farm.”

https://www.mtdemocrat.com/news/hemp-program-could-take-seed-in-2023/comment-page-1/

Dale Schafer Law News – 9/22/22

#californiacannabis – “New legislation in California gives off-duty cannabis users the right to fight discrimination in the workplace and prohibits California employers from firing workers or refusing to hire applicants solely due to a positive cannabis test. You can read more about the new law in our Insight here. However, federal contractors should note that the new legislation does not preempt state or federal laws requiring employees to be tested for controlled substances or directing employers to maintain a drug-free workplace, such as those required for receiving federal funds, licensing, or federal contracts….

As we know, federal law preempts state law, but where there are no conflicts, the state law will govern. For example, some federal laws require testing for cannabis use, including Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations for pilots, truck drivers, and other safety‐sensitive transportation employees. To the extent the testing is required by the terms of a federal contract, the new California legislation would be in conflict, and those specific provisions of the state law would be unenforceable.”

https://www.fisherphillips.com/news-insights/what-federal-contractors-need-to-know-about-california-workers-new-cannabis-protections.html

#cannabisindustry – “As leaders in this industry, we need to encourage states and local governments to establish regulations and consult real experts who have been in the trenches throughout the years. We should avoid an industry dominated by those who don’t understand how the industry itself works. The cannabis industry, with the interplay between federal, state and local laws, is not like any other business. It is extremely difficult to survive, let alone thrive.”

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture-council/articles/helping-small-businesses-survive-and-thrive-the-burgeoning-legal-cannabis-industry-1361866/

#cannabislaw – Trademarks – “When the USPTO examines a use-based trademark application, the examining attorneys will scrutinize the identification and specimens of use to see if they indicate that the identified goods or services are illegal under federal law. If the specimens of use indicate that the goods or services involve cannabis related activities, then registration will be refused.

Similarly, if the USPTO examines an Intent-to-Use trademark application, the examining attorneys will scrutinize the identification to see whether it indicates that the identified goods or services are illegal under federal law. If there is any question about whether the goods or services involve cannabis related activities, the examining attorneys will make inquiries to the applicant. If the examining attorneys determine that the identified goods or services violate the CSA or the FDCA, then registration will be refused – even if use of the mark was only intended. See In re JJ206, LLC, dba JuJu Joints, 120 USPQ2d 1568 (TTAB 2016).

This has led to some creativity.

In attempts to avoid such refusals, some applicants that are seeking to register trademarks related to cannabis related goods or services have submitted identifications in Intent-to-Use applications with qualifying language, such as, “…all goods compliant with federal law” or “…all the foregoing not including any goods noncompliant with U.S. federal law.”  This creative strategy is designed to avoid any need to disclose specimens of use to the examining attorneys, and to rely on an intention to only use the trademark in connection with legal goods or services. Insofar as specimens in Intent-to-Use applications need not be submitted for several years after a notice of allowance, these applicants are hoping that bills like the MORE Act or SAFE Banking Act will become law, thereby making the existing cannabis-related refusals to register obsolete.”

https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2022/09/20/latest-developments-us-trademark-registrations-cannabis-products/id=151465/

#hempindustry – “El Dorado County leaders are making another attempt to incorporate legal cultivation of hemp through a pilot program meant to test the feasibility of the crop in the county.

The program, discussed during the Board of Supervisors’ Sept. 13 meeting, would consist of at most five hemp producers for the 2023 and 2024 growing seasons with a series of contingencies.

Those include a 200-foot setback in residential areas, adequate signage at the perimeter of grow sites, following California’s policies on THC testing and notifying schools located within 300 feet of a farm.”

https://www.mtdemocrat.com/news/hemp-program-could-take-seed-in-2023/comment-page-1/

Dale Schafer Law News – 9/21/22

#psilocybin – “A privately-owned Canadian pharmaceutical company is one step closer to commercializing a treatment for anorexia that uses psilocybin.

Xpira Pharmaceuticals will initiate a Phase 2a clinical trial looking at the efficacy of psilocybin-assisted therapeutic protocols in patients suffering from anorexia after receiving approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for its first Investigational New Drug application.

The Toronto-based firm said it aims to contribute to the successful outcome of treatment for patients with anorexia, including enhancing patients’ quality of life by furthering the development of its psilocybin-assisted treatment.”

https://www.greenmarketreport.com/psilocybin-for-anorexia-gets-fda-study-approval/

Courtesy of the National Law Review

#cannabispolitics – “Governor Gavin Newsome signed into law September 19, 2022 several measures relating to marijuana, including one that prohibits employment discrimination based on off-duty use of marijuana.  The law takes effect on January 1, 2024.

The law will prohibit an employer from discriminating against a person in hiring, termination, or any term or condition of employment, if the discrimination is based on:

The person’s use of cannabis off the job and away from the workplace. This paragraph does not prohibit an employer from discriminating in hiring, or any term or condition of employment, or otherwise penalize a person based on scientifically valid preemployment drug screening conducted through methods that do not screen for nonpsychoactive cannabis metabolites.

An employer-required drug screening test that has found the person to have nonpsychoactive cannabis metabolites in their hair, blood, urine, or other bodily fluids.

The law further notes that:

Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the chemical compound in cannabis that can indicate impairment and cause psychoactive effects.  After THC is metabolized, it is stored in the body as a nonpsychoactive cannabis metabolite.  These metabolites do not indicate impairment, only that an individual has consumed cannabis in the last few weeks. . . . While there is consensus that an employee should not arrive at a worksite high or impaired, when most tests are conducted for cannabis, the results only show the presence of the nonpsychoactive cannabis metabolite and have no correlation to impairment on the job.

As science has improved, employers now have access to multiple types of tests that do not rely on the presence of nonpsychoactive cannabis metabolites.  These alternative tests include impairment tests, which measure an individual employee against their own baseline performance and tests that identify the presence of THC in an individual’s bodily fluids.”

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/california-enacts-law-prohibiting-employment-discrimination-based-duty-marijuana-use

#californiacannabis – “The city of Sacramento paid nearly $700,000 to settle a lawsuit that claimed it charged exorbitant fines to predominantly Asian landlords whose tenants grew marijuana in their homes.

The settlement agreement, which the city signed in August, includes $650,000 in attorney’s fees, $35,000 to repay fines the property owner had paid, and roughly $10,000 in additional compensation….

Sacramento allows residents to have up to six pot plants. People who have more than that can be fined up to $500 per plant — a policy that’s still in place.

“Sacramento may have had good intentions, but its ordinance and enforcement have veered far from the guardrails imposed by law,” read the lawsuit, filed in September 2019 in Sacramento Superior Court. “Sacramento’s ordinance is unlawful. The way Sacramento Police enforces the unlawful ordinance is unlawful. The hearings that Sacramento gives owners who try to contest the wild penalty amounts are an outright abuse of power and a violation of the public trust. If Sacramento wants homeowners to respect rules, Sacramento must also respect the rules.””

https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article265681786.html

Dale Schafer Law News+ 9/20/22

#californiacannabis – “California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed 10 new cannabis bills into law ranging from SB 1326 to create a basis for interstate cannabis transactions with entities outside California, to SB 1186, which will grow patients’ access to legal cannabis. AB 1706 will seal old cannabis-related convictions and AB 2188 aims to protect against employment discrimination based on use of cannabis while away from the workplace. The measures also included AB 1885 to allow veterinarians to recommend cannabis for pets. Newsome signed the bills on Sunday, the statement said.”

https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/california-gov-gavin-newsom-signs-10-cannabis-bills-into-law-2022-09-20