Drug Laws Archives

Unarmed or Unwell: How Federal Law Infringes Medical Marijuana Users’ Second Amendment Rights
Gallery
Unarmed or Unwell: How Federal Law Infringes Medical Marijuana Users’ Second Amendment Rights

Unarmed or Unwell: How Federal Law Infringes Medical Marijuana Users’ Second Amendment Rights

June 14th, 2023|Categories: Emerging Litigation & Risk, Employment, Journal, New Featured Post for Home Page|Tags: constitutional law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Drug Laws, US Supreme Court|

The Author Griffen Thorne (griffen@harrisbricken.com) is an attorney in the Los Angeles office of Harris Bricken Sliwoski LLP, an international emerging markets law firm. He represents clients in highly regulated emerging industries, such as cannabis, in corporate and commercial transactions. Interviews with leading attorneys and other subject matter experts on new twists in the law and how the law is responding to new twists in the world. Unarmed or Unwell: How Federal Law Infringes Medical Marijuana Users’ Second Amendment Rights As Justice Amy Coney Barrett noted while on the Seventh Circuit, “legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing guns. But that power extends only to people who are dangerous.” In the coming years, the government’s ability to write off all medical marijuana users as dangerous is likely to be curtailed, even if the Controlled Substances Act continues to make marijuana use a federal crime. Abstract: In the wake of the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court case New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, federal courts have reached opposite outcomes on whether federal prohibitions on marijuana users’ rights to own or possess firearms are constitutional. As a result, there is a high likelihood of a circuit split that results in the overturning of those federal laws. The author [...]

Washington AG Sues Juul, Minnesota Judge Tosses RJR’s Suit to Overturn City’s Flavored Tobacco Ban, Verus Reports
Gallery
Washington AG Sues Juul, Minnesota Judge Tosses RJR’s Suit to Overturn City’s Flavored Tobacco Ban, Verus Reports

Washington AG Sues Juul, Minnesota Judge Tosses RJR’s Suit to Overturn City’s Flavored Tobacco Ban, Verus Reports

September 14th, 2020|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, HB Tort Notes, Mass Torts, News|Tags: appeals, constitutional law, Drug Laws, emerging litigation, mass torts|

Manager of Research Services Verus LLC klavin@verusllc.com 609-466-0427 Photo by Rubén Bagüés on Unsplash Litigation Update: Vaping and Flavored Tobacco Products Lawsuits The Washington state attorney general has filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court against Juul Inc., alleging that the company knowingly targeted minors in its marketing campaign on social media in an effort to push its products on young consumers. In the suit, Attorney Bob Ferguson claimed that in using young models, brightly colored ads and candy-flavored vaping juice, Juul violated Washington state’s consumer protection laws and failed to meet state tobacco product licensing regulations which would make the sales of the company’s e-cigarettes unlawful between August 2016 and April 2018 .... In another tobacco-related case, U.S. District Judge Patrick J. Schiltz tossed out R.J. Reynolds’ lawsuit against Edina, MN over the city’s ban on flavored tobacco products. The company had claimed that Edina had overstepped its authority with a ban that was aimed at curbing vaping by younger consumers. In his ruling, Judge Schiltz wrote that the ban fell under a provision of the federal tobacco laws granting local governments the authority to regulate the sale of certain products .... Read more at VerusLLC.com.

Nevada to try limited banking for cash-heavy pot industry — ElkoDaily.com

June 26th, 2019|Categories: Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, Technology Law|Tags: Banking & Finance, cannabis, compliance, Drug Laws, regulations|

Most marijuana dispensaries are forced to handle massive amounts of cash. Business owners are paying their employees with envelopes full of dollar bills, and bringing duffle bags full of money to government buildings to pay their taxes. That could all change with the new Nevada state law that allows dispensaries to offer a cashless option. This program will be tested for three years before being considered as a permanent feature. State Treasurer Zach Conine likened the system to gift cards or digital apps such as Venmo and said the program would not include broader banking services like loans. Since marijuana is still not legal federally, states are on their own with coming up with a cashless option. Hawaii took similar steps and included a debit payment app, which has spread to other states as well. California lawmakers are also devising a cashless system by creating a class of banks specifically for the industry. This temporary law is set to take place by July 1, 2020 with the hopes of easing transactions and lessen cash handling for customers and businesses Read the complete post by Michelle L. Price on ElkoDaily.com here!

The Wrong-Headedness of Hindsight Standards — Michelle Yeary | Drug & Device Law Blog

May 27th, 2019|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, HB Risk Notes, Mass Torts|Tags: Drug Laws, Drugs & Devices, Litigation & appeals, mass torts, Product Liability|

Dechert LLP attorney Michelle Yeary cautions against applying perfect hindsight to drug liability. "We all know hindsight is 20/20. And, it’s easy. There are dozens of television and radio programs that thrive on Monday morning quarterbacking. There’s no risk in saying the coach should have called for a pass when you already know the run didn’t work. It’s also dangerous because it’s easy. People are often too quick to point out that you should have taken path B after everyone learns path A is full of potholes. Pointing it out is one thing, holding you liable for it is another." Yeary takes a look at what happened in Holley v. Gilead Science, Inc., 2019 WL 2077845 (N.D. Cal. May 10, 2019). The case involves two of the main active ingredients in AIDS drugs: TDF and TAF. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant should be responsible for allegedly knowingly using TDF over TAF (allegedly a safer alternative). TDF was FDA approved first and TAF second. Unfortunately, Yeary wrote, hindsight "can be used to demand perfection," allowing plaintiffs to "proceed on what is essentially a stop-selling theory," that first-generation drugs should not be submitted to the FDA because, in hindsight, "later approved treatments were safer." That's what happened in Holley, she said. Read the complete post by Michelle Yeary on the Drug and [...]

Attorney General Ferguson of Washington Sues State’s Top Opioid Distributers

March 20th, 2019|Categories: Class Actions, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Risk Notes, HB Tort Notes, Mass Torts|Tags: class actions, Drug Laws, Drugs & Devices, Healthcare, mass torts|

“We are woefully under-resourced when it comes to treatment. The people who are responsible for this epidemic should being paying for it. We are going to hold these companies accountable and get more money into our communities for treatment.” --Washington AG Bob Ferguson The three largest distributors of prescription opioids in Washington State are being sued by Attorney General Bob Ferguson for fueling the state's opioid epidemic. Detailed in Ferguson's King County lawsuit are the billions of dollars made from these suspicious shipments of over 2 billion pills of unregulated oxycodone, fentanyl, hydrocodone and other opioids. "Prescriptions and sales of opioids in Washington skyrocketed more than 500 percent between 1997 and 2011. In 2011, at the peak of overall sales in Washington, more than 112 million daily doses of all prescription opioids were dispensed in the state — enough for a 16-day supply for every woman, man and child in Washington," according to the AG's announcement. "In 2014 McKesson, Cardinal Health and AmerisourceBergen shipped enough opioids to Pend Orielle County to supply every single resident with dozens of pills. In 2009, McKesson alone supplied enough for dozens of pills for every resident of the county. The specific shipment numbers are currently under seal." The accused distributors are in the top 15 Fortune 500 list based on 2017 revenue. In addition to the [...]

CBD: Confusing Regulations May Soon Find at Least Some Clarity — But Proceed With Caution

July 16th, 2018|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes|Tags: cannabis, compliance, Corporate & Securities, Drug Laws, regulations|

By Tom Hagy July 16, 2018 Proponents say the medical benefits are many and magnificent. You can feel better without feeling stoned. While that will be disappointing to some, people enduring a variety of ailments may find relief, proponents and some studies say. From inflammation to pain to anxiety. From arthritis to alcoholism to diabetes. From psychoses to seizures. Cannabidiol may cure what ails you. And in many cases the science is there, even studies sponsored by the government, say the folks at Project CBD. While the regulations vary from state to state, and the definitions can be confusing, clarity is coming for at least the hemp-derived variety of products – as opposed to its sister cannabis plant, marijuana – with the likely passage of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s Hemp Farm Bill. The measure is also noteworthy because it has drawn rare bipartisan support. CBD can be found in just about anything, from skin care products to pain medications to anti-seizure drugs—even beer. Companies, including large retailers, like Target, have tried to sell or are selling products containing CBD online or across state lines. While small compared to the marijuana industry, CBD is on a serious growth trajectory. “Spending on legal cannabis worldwide is expected to hit $57 billion by 2027,” according to an article at Forbes.com, written by Thomas [...]

Congressional Cannabis Proposal Would Can Criminalization

June 8th, 2018|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes|Tags: cannabis, compliance, Corporate & Securities, Drug Laws, emerging litigation|

Could this be the thing that brings the parties together? Here is a quote from an article written for Forbes.com by freelance writer Janet Burns. [Jolene Forman, staff attorney at the nonprofit Drug Policy Alliance] called the bill a "first step," and noted, “This bipartisan proposal clears the way for states to develop their own marijuana policies without fear of federal intervention. This will give states more opportunity to restore communities that have borne the brunt of the drug war and mass criminalization." So far, 30 states, Washington, DC and the U.S. territories of Guam and Puerto Rico have enacted medical marijuana legislation, while estimates suggest that 63 million Americans reside in areas where anyone over 21 may now legally possess the plant.