Federal disability law does not cover medical marijuana patients

An appeals court opinion is one of several examining the scope of state drug laws.

By Alicia Gallegos — Posted June 4, 2012

Print  |   Email  |   Respond  |   Reprints  |   Like Facebook  |   Share Twitter  |   Tweet Linkedin

Medical marijuana patients are not protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in a legal challenge pitting disabled California patients against local governments.

A panel of the appeals court threw out the patients’ lawsuit, which had charged that some California cities were violating the ADA by shuttering medical marijuana dispensaries. The ADA guarantees equal opportunity for disabled persons in employment, public accommodations, transportation and government services.

The court sympathized with the disabled residents but said federal law does not include protections for users of an illegal drug.

“We recognize that the plaintiffs are gravely ill and that their request for ADA relief implicates not only their right to live comfortably, but also their basic human dignity,” the court panel said in its May 21 opinion. “We also acknowledge that California has embraced marijuana as an effective treatment for individuals like the plaintiffs who face debilitating pain. Congress has made clear, however, that the ADA defines illegal drug use by reference to federal rather than state law, and federal law does not authorize the plaintiffs’ medical marijuana use.”

The court decision is one of several in recent months examining the scope of state medical marijuana laws. An Arizona court, for example, ruled in May that dispensaries must have a doctor as a medical director to operate. The medical director cannot be the same doctor who provides marijuana certifications to patients, the court said. In another case, the California Supreme Court affirmed a lower court’s decision that said residents seeking medical cannabis do not have to grow the plants themselves. The legal challenge was brought by California Attorney General Kamala Harris, who argued that cannabis users had to contribute in some way to cultivation to be protected by state law.

The court rulings illustrate the continuing conflict between states that have adopted medical marijuana laws and federal prohibitions against the drug, said Allen St. Pierre, executive director of NORML, an organization that advocates the legalization of marijuana and tracks state legal challenges over cannabis. Federal law classifies marijuana as a Schedule I drug, which has no approved medical uses.

The decisions “acknowledge the overall friction” between the federal government and states that enact such laws, St. Pierre said. That friction “sets up a background where states are caught between a rock and a hard place.”

In the Arizona case, medical marijuana advocates had requested that a court overturn state restrictions mandating that dispensaries have doctors to run the facilities, saying the rule was overly restrictive. However, Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County Judge Richard Gama said the restriction had been detailed plainly when the law went into effect and that the plaintiffs waited too long to challenge the rule.

Having a doctor manage medical marijuana dispensaries helps prevent drug abuse and ensures that the facilities are running properly, said Will Humble, MPH, director of the Arizona Dept. of Health Services. A medical director must have an active license and be a medical doctor, a doctor of osteopathic medicine, a homeopathic medical specialist or a naturopathic medical specialist.

“We wanted to make sure that the dispensaries were acting in the best interest of the patients and not just moving product,” he said. “I wanted to have someone there with some skin in the game. Physicians have invested time, energy and money into their licenses. They have something to lose if something unprofessional” occurs.

Humble noted that the state has lost another challenge related to Arizona’s 2010 medical marijuana statute. In that case, a court blocked the state from restricting dispensary applicants based on past bankruptcies or on missed child support or tax payments.

At this article’s deadline, Compassion First, a plaintiff in the Arizona case, had not returned a call seeking comment. In the California case, both parties had not returned messages seeking comment by this article’s deadline.

More states may legalize

At least 17 states have laws that legalize medical marijuana use. Massachusetts and North Dakota voters will decide on similar initiatives this year, while residents in Colorado and Washington state will vote on the general issue of marijuana legalization. Most recently, Connecticut enacted a law allowing for the use of medical marijuana. The bill awaits a signature from Gov. Dannel P. Malloy.

Meanwhile, a group of governors is continuing to push the federal government to reclassify marijuana so that the drug is more widely accepted for medical treatment. At least five governors have signed a petition asking the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to conduct a new scientific review of cannabis research. In addition, the California Medical Assn. adopted policy in 2011 supporting the drug’s legalization. Physicians need better research on the drug to counsel patients better, which is not possible under the current federal prohibitions, CMA President James T. Hay, MD, said.

The DEA continues to consider the requests.

Back to top


Cases at a glance

Are disabled patients who use medical marijuana entitled to protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act?

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said no. Because marijuana use is illegal under federal law, medical marijuana patients are not protected by the ADA regardless of state laws allowing for use of the drug, the court said.

Impact: Residents cannot use the ADA as a defense when challenging localities that have shut down medical marijuana dispensaries.

Marla James, Wayne Washington, James Armantrout, Charles Daniel DeJong v. City of Costa Mesa, City of Lake Forest, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, May 21 (link)

Are medical marijuana dispensaries in Arizona required to have a medical director who is a doctor?

The Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County said yes. The plaintiffs were fully aware of the medical director rule when the medical marijuana law was enacted, and they waited too long to challenge the restriction, the court said.

Impact: In order to operate in the state, a medical marijuana dispensary must have a medical director who is a licensed medical doctor, doctor of osteopathic medicine, naturopathic specialist or homeopathic specialist.

Compassion First LLC, v. State of Arizona, Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County, May 1

Back to top

External links

Marla James, Wayne Washington, James Armantrout, Charles Daniel Dejong v. City of Costa Mesa, City of Lake Forest, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, May 21 (link)

Back to top



Read story

Confronting bias against obese patients

Medical educators are starting to raise awareness about how weight-related stigma can impair patient-physician communication and the treatment of obesity. Read story

Read story


American Medical News is ceasing publication after 55 years of serving physicians by keeping them informed of their rapidly changing profession. Read story

Read story

Policing medical practice employees after work

Doctors can try to regulate staff actions outside the office, but they must watch what they try to stamp out and how they do it. Read story

Read story

Diabetes prevention: Set on a course for lifestyle change

The YMCA's evidence-based program is helping prediabetic patients eat right, get active and lose weight. Read story

Read story

Medicaid's muddled preventive care picture

The health system reform law promises no-cost coverage of a lengthy list of screenings and other prevention services, but some beneficiaries still might miss out. Read story

Read story

How to get tax breaks for your medical practice

Federal, state and local governments offer doctors incentives because practices are recognized as economic engines. But physicians must know how and where to find them. Read story

Read story

Advance pay ACOs: A down payment on Medicare's future

Accountable care organizations that pay doctors up-front bring practice improvements, but it's unclear yet if program actuaries will see a return on investment. Read story

Read story

Physician liability: Your team, your legal risk

When health care team members drop the ball, it's often doctors who end up in court. How can physicians improve such care and avoid risks? Read story

  • Stay informed
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn