A divided U.S. appeals court has ruled that a New Jersey law barring employment discrimination against cannabis users does not allow for private lawsuits, effectively dismissing a proposed class action against Walmart. In a 2-1 decision, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the state law, passed by voters in 2020, did not provide any explicit remedy for workers seeking to sue employers, leaving enforcement solely in the hands of state authorities.
The case centered on Erick Zanetich, who was denied a security guard job at Walmart after testing positive for cannabis. Zanetich argued that Walmart’s drug screening policy violated the New Jersey law, which prohibits employers from discriminating against employees or job applicants for using cannabis off-duty, though it allows termination for impairment while at work.
The court’s majority, led by Circuit Judge Peter Phipps, concluded that the absence of a private right of action in the law indicated a deliberate choice by the state legislature to delegate enforcement to the state’s cannabis board. The ruling affirmed the dismissal of Zanetich’s 2022 lawsuit, which had sought to challenge Walmart’s hiring practices.
“We are pleased with the Third Circuit’s opinion,” said Walmart spokeswoman Kelly Hellbusch in a statement.
However, Zanetich’s attorney, Justin Swidler, expressed disappointment, calling the ruling a setback for cannabis and employment rights in New Jersey. “Our team is evaluating all options, including seeking en banc review, as we remain committed to defending the protections New Jersey voters chose to establish for workers in our state,” Swidler said.
New Jersey’s cannabis law, which legalized recreational marijuana use, was intended to shield workers from job discrimination based on cannabis use outside of work hours. However, it did not specifically create a right for employees to sue employers for violations, prompting the court to rule in Walmart’s favor.
In dissent, Circuit Judge Arianna Freeman argued that the New Jersey legislature would have explicitly prohibited private lawsuits if it intended to do so, suggesting that the New Jersey Supreme Court should be asked to weigh in on the matter. Freeman’s position highlighted the broad impact the ruling could have on employment rights in the state, particularly as more states enact similar cannabis laws.
This decision marks a significant development in the ongoing legal debate surrounding employment protections for cannabis users, with advocates for worker rights likely to push for further legal action to clarify the scope of such protections in New Jersey.
Read more: