{"id":74882,"date":"2024-05-02T08:48:48","date_gmt":"2024-05-02T16:48:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/2024\/05\/02\/new-jersey-marijuana-legalization-program-doesnt-violate-federal-law-appeals-court-panel-rules\/"},"modified":"2024-05-02T12:45:23","modified_gmt":"2024-05-02T20:45:23","slug":"new-jersey-marijuana-legalization-program-doesnt-violate-federal-law-appeals-court-panel-rules","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/2024\/05\/02\/new-jersey-marijuana-legalization-program-doesnt-violate-federal-law-appeals-court-panel-rules\/","title":{"rendered":"New Jersey Marijuana Legalization Program Doesn\u2019t Violate Federal Law, Appeals Court Panel Rules"},"content":{"rendered":"<\/p>\n

\u201cThe statute does not require any business to sell marijuana, or any municipality to adopt, as here, an ordinance to allow marijuana dispensaries within its borders.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

By Sophie Nieto-Mu\u00f1oz, New Jersey Monitor<\/strong><\/p>\n

New Jersey\u2019s recreational cannabis law is able to \u201ccoexist\u201d with federal marijuana enforcement laws, a state appellate court said in a\u00a0decision\u00a0Wednesday.<\/p>\n

Judge Jack Sabatino, writing for a three-judge panel, affirmed a lower court\u2019s ruling against a group of Highland Park residents who claimed the borough violated federal law by allowing the sale of recreational marijuana<\/a>, which remains federally illegal.<\/p>\n

At the center of the\u00a0legal fight\u00a0is an ordinance the council adopted in August 2021 that allowed cannabis retailers, consumption lounges, and delivery services to operate in the borough. A group of anti-cannabis residents\u00a0claimed not just the ordinance, but the New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance and Marketplace Modernization Act (CREAMMA), violated the federal Controlled Substances Act, New Jersey Municipal Land Use Law, and other state and federal laws.<\/p>\n

But Sabatino said the state\u2019s recreational law doesn\u2019t violate either section of the Supremacy Clause, which says state laws cannot violate federal laws.<\/p>\n

He cited\u00a0Hager v. M&K Construction, a 2021 New Jersey Supreme Court decision that found the Controlled Substances Act \u201cexplicitly leaves room for state law to operate.\u201d In that case, the company was ordered to reimburse costs for a worker\u2019s prescribed medical marijuana after he got injured at work. The company said if it reimbursed those costs, it could face federal criminal liability, an argument the court rejected.<\/p>\n

The Highland Park plaintiffs argued that case doesn\u2019t apply because it focused on medical marijuana, but the Attorney General\u2019s Office and borough officials disagreed.<\/p>\n

Federal justice officials had advised local government officials to deprioritize prosecution of \u201cmarijuana activities\u201d that are legal under state law, and Congress passed appropriations bills that barred the Department of Justice from using allocated funds to prosecute marijuana crimes in states where it\u2019s legal, like New Jersey, Sabatino wrote.<\/p>\n

If federal officials decided they wanted to pursue cases more aggressively for violating federal marijuana laws, the state\u2019s law wouldn\u2019t get in the way, he said. The two can coexist simultaneously, he added.<\/p>\n

\u201cCREAMMA does not require any person to possess, purchase, or use marijuana. The statute does not require any business to sell marijuana, or any municipality to adopt, as here, an ordinance to allow marijuana dispensaries within its borders,\u201d he said. \u201cThe residents and marijuana businesses of this state act at the risk that their activities might be prosecuted by federal authorities.\u201d<\/p>\n

Sabatino also noted the federal government\u2019s shifting tone on marijuana, saying the executive branch \u201cmuddied the waters.\u201d On Tuesday, federal Drug Enforcement Administration officials\u00a0confirmed\u00a0they plan to reclassify marijuana<\/a> from Schedule I to Schedule III. (This wasn\u2019t mentioned in the decision.)<\/p>\n

It\u2019s been\u00a0over two years\u00a0since recreational cannabis sales launched in New Jersey after voters approved legalizing marijuana through a 2020 ballot question. More than 100 dispensaries have opened since then, including at least\u00a0one\u00a0in Highland Park.<\/p>\n

New Jersey\u2019s decision follows other state courts\u2019 rulings, Sabatino said. Oklahoma\u2019s high court held that the state\u2019s 2020 constitutional amendment to allow recreational marijuana was not preempted by federal law. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire also ruled that statutes concerning reimbursement of the cost of medical marijuana did not conflict with the Controlled Substances Act. And most recently, a New York state court underscored Congress\u2019 decision not to interfere with state marijuana laws.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe are mindful that some other state court opinions have adopted contrary approaches, but we find them less persuasive than the above cases,\u201d Sabatino wrote<\/a>.<\/p>\n

While the court affirmed the claims of preemption, the appellate court also reversed the dismissal of the complaint suing over the ordinance that a lower court had found untimely.<\/p>\n

The trial court has 20 days to convene a case conference regarding the dismissed filing. Attorneys for the borough and the residents did not respond to requests for comment.<\/p>\n

This story was first published by New Jersey Monitor.<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

\n

Marijuana Legalization Opponents Raise Money For Potential Lawsuit Against Federal Rescheduling Move<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

Photo elements courtesy of rawpixel<\/a> and Philip Steffan<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

The post New Jersey Marijuana Legalization Program Doesn\u2019t Violate Federal Law, Appeals Court Panel Rules<\/a> appeared first on Marijuana Moment<\/a>.<\/p>\n


\n
\nRead More: New Jersey Marijuana Legalization Program Doesn\u2019t Violate Federal Law, Appeals Court Panel Rules<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cThe statute does not require any business to sell marijuana, or any municipality to adopt, as here, an ordinance to allow marijuana dispensaries within its borders.\u201d By Sophie Nieto-Mu\u00f1oz, New Jersey Monitor New Jersey\u2019s recreational cannabis law is able to \u201ccoexist\u201d with federal marijuana enforcement laws, a state appellate courtContinue Reading<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":457,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"false","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[81],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74882"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/457"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=74882"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74882\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":74883,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74882\/revisions\/74883"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74882"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=74882"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=74882"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}